Rep. Kucinich Won't Challenge Obama in Primary

[MineralMan]

Source: ABC News

Rep. Dennis Kucinich told me today that he will not challenge President Obama in the presidential primary and instead called for unity in the Democratic Party.

"I think what we have to do is focus on coming together for the purposes of getting out of Iraq and Afghanistan," the former presidential candidate said.

Read more: http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2010/08/rep-kucinich-wont-challenge-obama-in-primary.html

---

See the link for more. This is very clear. We should listen.

[LaurenG]

1. Kucinich is a smart man. Besides who in their right mind runs against the incumbent ?

:shrug:

[MineralMan]

2. He is a smart man. He wants Democrats to unite to

prevent an even worse outcome.

[LaurenG]

5. I think we "professionals" are all pretty pissed

but most of us know how this works.

[FSogol]

10. Pissed at Dennis Kuncinch?

:shrug:

[LaurenG]

13. No -I love Dennis. nt

[jaxx]

57. Who do you write for?

I'll look up some of your stuff if you give me a link to your professional works.

[fogonthelake]

124. There is a list of the Professional Left here on DU.

[Ken Burch]

161. Am I on it?

If so, somebody owes me a ton of back pay.

[fogonthelake]

163. If you work for social justice, then you should be on it.

[dflprincess]

104. "Reelect Obama -

He's not as bad as the other candidate!"

Not very catchy, but more honest than "hope & change". Not really very motivating either.

[EXneoCON]

133. Sorta' like the one my ex-wife made up...

...about two Southern cities who were vying for "Murder Capital of the US" back in the early '90's -

"Atlanta, safer than Miami"

[Rhiannon12866]

164. +1!

I totally agree. I've loved seeing DK in the debates and coverage of him on the news because, when he runs, he's able to get his message out there. He's been my candidate since 2003, but I support his decision. He's doing the right thing, as always... :patriot:

[Beacool]

31. Ted Kennedy comes to mind.

:eyes:

[LaurenG]

84. That didn't work out too well

I do miss Ted Kennedy.

[defendandprotect]

177. True -- but only because of what looks like the foresight of the right wing ...

to make sure he was blocked --

Chappaquidic looks like another myth -- arranged by the right wing --

[Ken Burch]

193. I've often thought that Teddy really didn't want to get into that race

That's the only explanation I can think of for a man who is, if nothing else, a master campaigner suddenly running the worst presidential campaign in recent memory(to that time).

There was something about his handling of that that always gave me the feeling that Teddy's heart really wasn't in it.

[defendandprotect]

114. Ted Kennedy . . . Bobby Kennedy . .. Eugene McCarthy . . . George McGovern. . . .

[LaurenG]

116. Ok to Clarify - Run against and win. nt

[robertpaulsen]

144. For historical clarification -

McCarthy & Bobby Kennedy ran against the incumbent Johnson in 1968. It was their entry in the wake of the Tet offensive that precipitated the incumbent's withdrawal. Neither won their party's nomination, though I think it's safe to say Kennedy certainly had the momentum to do so had he not been assassinated.

[LaurenG]

146. But Johnson stepped down he didn't run as the incombent nt

[robertpaulsen]

148. Actually, Johnson was running as of the New Hampshire primary.

Little known fact, but Johnson actually won the New Hampshire primary in 1968.

[LaurenG]

155. premature incombecation? :)

I didn't know that interesting fact, thanks for telling me. :hi:

[robertpaulsen]

158. You're welcome! :)

And I certainly hope 2012 is no 1968. The GOP doesn't have anyone as liberal as Nixon.

[Ken Burch]

170. He won, but just barely

McCarthy got 42% to Johnson's 49%. The point was that Johnson, as the incumbent, should have cleaned McCarthy's clock.

And Johnson stayed in the race until the eve of the Wisconsin primary-polls showed him losing there to McCarthy and badly. After the witdrawal, Johnson's support in Wisconsin went up a bit(a "sympathy bounce")but he STILL lost 57%-35%.

And this, against a candidate nobody had heard of until the beginning of '68.

It's time to stop the spin. Johnson WAS forced out by an unexpectedly strong showing from an obscure challenger(also, to a degree, by the fact that Bobby Kennedy FINALLY decided to get in after McCarthy showed that Johnson wasn't invincible). This would have led to a Democratic victory if either Kennedy hadn't been shot OR if the party, in Chicago, hadn't acceded to Johnson's demand that the "peace Democrats" be crushed on the convention floor.

[robertpaulsen]

178. No spin from me.

You're reiterating the same point I made in post 144. What I was trying to illustrate to LaurenG is that there is historical precedent for a Democratic primary challenger to take down an incumbent, regardless of whether they win or not. It's also important to remember what a huge effect the Tet Offensive had in waking up the majority of the general populace to the fact that the Vietnam War, which Johnson was responsible for escalating, was unwinnable.

Could something like this happen in 2012? Who can say what may unfold in two years time? As it stands now, I don't think there's anything that could happen in Iraq or Afghanistan that could propel a "peace Democrat" to victory or cause Incumbent Obama to bow out.

But then, there is the economy...

[Ken Burch]

181. It would probably take

1)A much WORSE economic situation, combined with a much more conservative Administration response(as in the essentially Republican policies the Carter Administration carried out after 1978);

and/or

2)A bogdown in Iraq/Afghanistan (unexpected further escalation in Afghanistan, re-escalation in Iraq)accompanied by at least serious rumors of the introduction of a draft.

[saigon68]

197. Bobby would have won

It however, "Wasn't to Be"

[defendandprotect]

175. There's always a FIRST time .... liberals/progressives have worked to move Dems to LEFT ....

they shouldn't quit now -- !!

Especially when Obama/Rahm-DLC/Gibbs and their Wall Street gang are so busy

moving government to the right -- !!

[defendandprotect]

176. Well, TPB killed Bobby Kennedy . . . which should remind us how dangerous

it is for any American to stand up against war --

[kath]

188. Teddy Kennedy ran against the incumbent.

just sayin'...

[FSogol]

3. Uh oh, time to throw Kucinich under the bus.

(Stated since someone already unrec'ed your post)

[MineralMan]

4. I'm just posting the news. I didn't write it.

It's news. Why an unrec in the first place. That's just silly. Discuss the story. It's news.

[FSogol]

9. I agree. It is always time for the Democrats to unite. n/t

[Zorra]

20. Conservadems automatically unrec any OP that contains the word "Kucinich".

They're afraid of people that challenge the status quo of corporate governance.

[jaxx]

56. What are conservadems?

[Roland99]

66. Are you for real? You seriously can't be that ignorant of the corporatists in the Dem party.

You've never heard the terms "conservadems", "corporatists", "DLC"??

Seriously??

[jaxx]

72. Anyone who reads here has seen those words in use.

I want definitions. What do they mean? If nothing then they are just empty words.

[Roland99]

81. Anyone who reads here and has seen those words knows what they are

Doesn't take much to figure it out.

[JonLP24]

162. In the dictionary

Zell Miller's picture is next to the word Conservadem.

There are others like him but he was the conservadem.

[fujiyama]

204. Hell I thought in a dictionary

his picture is next to the word "crackpot".

[Enthusiast]

149. You are asking what are conservadems?

Conservadems is a label we give those Democrats (in name only) that are more concerned with the wishes of corporations than taking care of the welfare of their living, breathing human constituents.

[Zorra]

199. That's it. So called "Democrats" that advocate/support corporatocracy over democracy,

either complicitly or in ignorance. "Reagan Democrats" are IMO a good example of the ignorant conservadem voter. In their ignorance, they did not really understand that they were advocating for someone that would deliberately allow multinational corporations to gain control of our government, supplanting government of, by and for the people with a government of, by, and for the corporations. Their ignorant actions are directly responsible for the crises our country faces today, due to the fact that Reagan completely sold the country out to private commercial enterprise.

The belief that the rights and well being of private commercial enterprise takes precedence over the rights and well being of human beings, individually and collectively is, in reality, the core principle of the Republican Party.

Democrats like Dennis Kucinich advocate for the reinstatement of democracy and the limitation or abolition of corporate influence on our government.

So why would any Democrat be so vehemently in opposition to the democratic ideas of leaders like Dennis Kucinich, Bernie Sanders, and Alan Grayson?

Answer: They are either ignorant, like the aforementioned "Reagan Democrat", or they willingly support the core principle of the Republican Party, like DLC supporters.

And yes, this is absolutely the purity test that distinguishes genuine Democrats from Republicans/DINO/other.

[Enthusiast]

202. I'm done with Conservadems. nt

[davidinalameda]

154. anyone that doesn't pass the purity test put forth by some on here

[justinaforjustice]

156. For A History of Conservadems, See My Post Today.

I posted the story of how the socially liberal but fiscally corporatist Rockefeller Republicans were thrown out of the official Republican Party by the extremist religious conservatives. These exiled Republicans, organized under the rubric of the Democratic Leadership Council, proceeded to use their vast financial resources to successfully take control of the Democratic Party, thus sending the traditional labor and progressive Democratic forces into the fringes. These "liberal Republican" efforts culminated in the Clinton and now the Obama administrations who, while occasionally mouthing traditional Democratic Party values rhetoric, actually carry out the policies of their corporate benefactors. Voila, we now have the Obama Republicans in office. See further if interested:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8924091&mesg_id=8924361

[mrdmk]

196. Let's make this real easy on you...

Click Here --> http://www.dlc.org/

[DFW]

93. Some people just unrec everything they see. Pay it no mind

Some people would unrec a post saying that the sun rises in the east. You'll know never know who or why.

[BootinUp]

8. Grayson/Ellison 2012!!!!

weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!!!!!!!

[Frisbee]

24. Any ticket with Grayson works for me!

[BootinUp]

29. Hint: That was a joke. nt

[Frisbee]

49. Gotta confess...

I didn't pick up on that. (I guess "weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!!!!!!!" should have given it away) But, while I don't expect Grayson to run against Obama in 2012, I'd LOVE to see him running in 2016.

[BootinUp]

78. Seriously though

don't you think there are more pressing concerns? Let me put it this way. Politicians change, there is really no telling what Grayson will be saying in 2 years and certainly not in 6.

[OnyxCollie]

85. Considering Rep Grayson is acting the same way

he acted when he was a lawyer prosecuting corrupt defense contractors like Custer Battles, I'd say he's pretty consistent in his principles.

How 'bout you?

[ooglymoogly]

89. Grayson has remained true to his core values.

He does not say one thing to one group and something entirely different to another and then act in diametrically apposed actions to the honorable common sense things he represents.

He has acted honorably on those principles in everything he has ever said or done in his public life.

[BootinUp]

92. I don't have a problem with Grayson

I have a problem with idiots pushing a primary challenge to the President. I am merely pointing out that he is not running for national office and if he were, and was serious about it, you would see a noticeable change based on what it takes to win.

[OnyxCollie]

110. What you said was:

"Politicians change, there is really no telling what Grayson will be saying in 2 years and certainly not in 6."

You made an unsubstantiated claim that Allan Grayson would not stay true to his principles, despite his remaining true to his principles after being elected in a conservative district.

It sounds like your main concern is "winning"; Principles are only the means, not the ends.

[BootinUp]

111. I know what I said

and I know what I didn't say.

[OnyxCollie]

112. Typical non-response.

Do you work in PR? Or do you just play someone who works in PR on the Internets?

[BootinUp]

113. You first. lol nt.

[OnyxCollie]

115. I know you are. But what am I?

Fail.

[BootinUp]

120. Ok, I guess we both failed. nt

[OnyxCollie]

126. No, just you. nt

[BootinUp]

128. lol nt

[Iowa]

123. +1

[Frisbee]

132. There certainly are, and I am able to think about them...

simultaneously. And if Grayson's opinions move to the right between now and 2016, I will most certainly reevaluate my opinion of him. But right now, he seems to be one of the few shining lights in the Democratic party (and he has a backbone as well).

[ooglymoogly]

74. It was not a joke to me....though wheeeeeeee clearly does not ring true;

Except perhaps in the case of a giddy child, as it does not come close to passing the sidesplitting bar as snark.

Six and half more years, bowing to corporatism, disregarding the constitution and nullifying its inconvenient parts;

A policy of applying the law only when convenient; Only applying selectively, to those without a hundred million dollars or so; Not quallified as a good ol boy;

A policy that Spells disaster for justice, the thing no democracy can survive without; And a disaster to whatever freedoms are left in this country;

To say nothing of its national reputation as screaming hypocrites; And whatever respect it has left around the world; The respect to a great nation to that of a banana republic. 2 and 1/2 more years of desperately seeking a pat on the head from corporates, may already be too late.

So let me say ALLEN GRAYSON 2012 one more time with real sincerity.

ALLEN GRAYSON 2012, ALLEN GRAYSON 2012, ALLEN GRAYSON 2012, ALLEN GRAYSON 2012, ALLEN GRAYSON 2012, ALLEN GRAYSON 2012.

[Solomon]

109. Boy, I can't wait for the day he becomes president,

finds out he can't say the things as president that he's saying now, and gets dumped under the bus.

[Iowa]

125. Well said ooglymoogly. I agree.

[Roland99]

6. The only way for the party to unite is for the party to slap the shit outta the DLCers

and for the White House to stop turning a deaf ear to those that put him in office by voting for him.

[ixion]

7. Spot on, that.

[Davis_X_Machina]

14. Great idea!

Finally we'll get the party discipline, unified vision, focus on actual progressive values, and coherent messaging of a real Democratic party that is the only thing that will save the country.

We can't achieve that till we're freed as a party from distractions and encumbrances like having a majority, passing legislation, or governing -- all those thing that just distract us from what is really important.

[BootinUp]

16. Where do I sign up??!!!!!!!!!!!

:bounce:

[Roland99]

18. Fat lot of good that majority has done. Giving in to the GOP at every cough and sneeze they make.

Obama moved so fast to the center-right it made Clinton's move look glacial.

[RaleighNCDUer]

32. Because Democrats passing Repulbican legislation has worked

so well for us up to now.

[ooglymoogly]

96. It makes "there's no difference between the parties"; "They are all the same";

A fact; Destroying the true democratic party and its integrity and principles; Which I think has been the plan of the DLC from the get go.

[dmallind]

41. So the only way to unite the party is to

"slap the shit out of" many of its elected representatives, all of whom we can assume voted for him just as much as those who....now think he is equal to Bush?


Oooookkkaaayy.

[Roland99]

46. say what?? You saying you have no problem with the corporatists taking over the Democratic Party?

If so, why are you even here?

[jaxx]

59. What is a corporatist?

[Roland99]

64. Any Republican, any DLCer, for starters.

[jaxx]

71. So a corporatist is a DLCer?

And a republican?

And they're taking over the Democratic Party?

[ooglymoogly]

165. Blind eyes have no need of glasses even if, they be of the deepest rose.

But I must assume, no matter the apposing evidence, that this post, might, perhaps not perceivable to the naked eye, have some facet of reason, no matter the blurring and white noise distortion levels;

In sympathy,

If that is the only lens seen through, the rose colored one; Put Rahm under even the thickest part of that rose colored lens and put on a best thinking cap, If only to get some sense of the mountains of frustration on this site; And let us hear some reality based thought.

[OnyxCollie]

86. TOPIC DILUTION.

Technique #3 - 'TOPIC DILUTION'
Topic dilution is not only effective in forum sliding it is also very useful in keeping the forum readers on unrelated and non-productive issues. This is a critical and useful technique to cause a 'RESOURCE BURN.' By implementing continual and non-related postings that distract and disrupt (trolling ) the forum readers they are more effectively stopped from anything of any real productivity. If the intensity of gradual dilution is intense enough, the readers will effectively stop researching and simply slip into a 'gossip mode.' In this state they can be more easily misdirected away from facts towards uninformed conjecture and opinion. The less informed they are the more effective and easy it becomes to control the entire group in the direction that you would desire the group to go in. It must be stressed that a proper assessment of the psychological capabilities and levels of education is first determined of the group to determine at what level to 'drive in the wedge.' By being too far off topic too quickly it may trigger censorship by a forum moderator.

Don't give in to it. You're wasting your time and energy.

[Roland99]

87. yeah...after I noticed that poster making the same intentionally obtuse posts all thru the thread

I realized I was dealing with someone who knows exactly what I'm talking about (and what everyone else up already knows).

Probably one of the unrec birds, too.

[Phil The Cat]

171. A materialistic person!

Someone who puts profits before people!

Someone who believes an artifical entity is the same as a flesh and blood human being!

[dmallind]

65. Because it's Democratic Underground, not anti-capitalist fringe underground. NT

[Roland99]

69. Excuse me for holding onto "old school" Democratic principles

you know...labor, social safety net, civil rights, equal rights, protecting the environment, people not corporations, etc.

[dmallind]

75. Thinking Obama is Bush is an old school Democratic principle?

[Roland99]

82. You always put words into peoples' mouths like that?

[ooglymoogly]

98. Wow! swim with red herrings much?

[polmaven]

80. Is there a hidden sentence hidden

in that post that only you can read? Where in the world did you see anything about the poster having no "problem with the corporatists taking overt the Democratic Party"? No one has said anything about "corporatists" taking over.

The Democratic Party has, however, always had room for more than one viewpoint. Do you have a problem with that? If so, why are you even here?

[ooglymoogly]

107. Me, me, me,...I said it too many times to count, cus it's true in big blinking neon.

We are being eaten alive by the DLC'ers, with the accompanying propaganda that; "there is no difference between the parties';

which the DLC'rs are making into a self fulfilling prophecy;
Gutting the Democratic party we hold dear;

Shattering its once hallowed principles; That we are all fellow travelers on this planet and that we are indeed our brothers friends in need and that all must have a level playing field;

With standard bearers FDR, JFK, RFK et al, whose sense of fairness was not just some hoked up sham to get elected;

Shitting on their memory and gutting their policies. Policies that truly helped the people of this country and the vital understanding of basic fairness; Shredding those principles and policies of fairness to make firewood to burn the straw armies they are so intent on erecting ad infinitum to cloud their theft.

The DLC, if they have not already, are destroying the Democratic party, making it no different from the republican party.(Spelled 'The Corporatocrcacy party')

[polmaven]

131. I see...

so there is not, in your opinion, any room for any view point that differs from the one you hold. There is one way to get things done, and one way only, and if that way is blocked by the (R)s then it should never be compromised. Much better to abandon it altogether. Gee - Now I get it.

[ooglymoogly]

142. No, you don't.

Good common sense legislation is not being blocked by the republicans, except as the minority; It is being blocked by the Bluedogs, Dino's and DlC'rs, who are the crutch, the pinch hitters, the pugs need when all else fails and a filibuster or mass water down to meaningless is needed to destroy and stop legislation in its tracks;

Including vital and necessary legislation to successful government and a successful country and a successful economy; Any legislation, in fact, that might in the slightest, harm corpworld, or limit its theft, or subject it to the laws and rules the rest of us live by; That unlike corporate CEO's, when broken, are sent to jail in no uncertain terms, sometimes for life, sometimes for victimless "crimes" that might infringe on sacrosanct corporate profits.

Many draconian laws whose only purpose it is to protect corporate profits.

And no I do not believe the big tent clap trap covers accepting pug moles in our party to work from within against us, simply because they have an oh so obvious, suspect D after their name.

[Plucketeer]

150. No, you don't "get it".

Explain to me how this jibes with what our leader said while telling what he'd do for HCR.... For all the pretty hoo-ha about health care for all, what we really got was subsidies for health insurance companies. There's no better night and day example than that. But we could provide more if that's not convincing enough. Of course, maybe I need to be tested for drugs.

[jaxx]

58. What or who are the DLCers?

[justinaforjustice]

167. Formerly Liberal Republicans Who Were Chased Out of Republican Party, Became the DLC.

See my post of today for more information: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8924091&mesg_id=8924361

[ooglymoogly]

169. Excellent, though I might have said; Formerly less rabid republicans,

who could not pass the lunatic test of convincingly performing the illusion of walking on water or pulling off the ruse of a plastic halo, the first test of the insane asylum grandly called The Republican party, or the Corporatist Party, bearing no resemblance to their actions, that, more aptly, should be called ReFLUBlublicans, Flubs and Flubbers.

[ooglymoogly]

91. Exactly, I'll ad my loud drum to that....good post

[totodeinhere]

129. Wouldn't that divide the party? The DLC elements surely would not want to unite with everyone else

if they are getting the shit slapped out of them. Plus it would probably mean that we lose Congress. Not good.

[Roland99]

135. What would be the difference?

Not like this Congress has done much, if anything, to enact a progressive agenda.

as I wrote a couple of days ago:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4498155&mesg_id=4498435

[totodeinhere]

147. A GOP controlled congress would be much worse.

I am disappointed in this congress too, but if you think this is bad, wait and see what the GOP has in store for us if they regain power. For one thing, there certainly would be no more extended unemployment benefits and they would vote to extend the Bush tax cuts for the rich.

Yes, it's true that we had a hard enough time getting extended benefits passed through this congress, and the fate of the Bush tax cuts is uncertain with this congress. But it's infinitely better than what the other side would give us.

[ooglymoogly]

184. That they would unite with us on any of our termes of strict Dem principals, is a cruel joke

and not in the cards.

What they want from us is our blind and uncritical support.

And that is their only terms of "uniting";

That is no more than an ultimatum to lose our democratic principles or keep quiet.

They have already proven their fealty and it ain't to us; For clearly, they have nothing in common with us; Certainly not Democratic values and principals.

We are living in an obviously false supremacy that has proven to be a deathtrap to the Democratic Party; Giving it nothing and by deception, stealing its soul; Making itself under DLC no different than the Flubs;

For nothing more than a pretense at running things; That a now meaningless D after their names makes them in charge while much more comfortably changing their colors and allegiances; It is nothing more than a fawning pretense; An illusion and a forced suicide by deception of the remaining true democrats who are not willing to sacrifice their principles on the alter of corporatism.

A near fete accompli; Smoke and mirrors by the corporate string pullers; To keep this country in bondage while with the bull horn of propaganda, convincing us to accept their full on advance and fatal blows to the constitution under "*" et al;

To consilidate their vast theft and frauds, knowing after the "*" carnage they could no longer convince the people an "R" win believable, as in the fixed elections of "*" et al, no matter how much propaganda they catapulted; They knew it had to be a "D" and what we see, is what we got and the continued corporate dominance that is still in full advance; Is all we have to show for the herculean effort to get dems in office to stop the Military, Industrial, Wall st. takeover of our government.

Looming before us is a system, In the model of "The Company Store, Roller Ball, and an Orwellian propagandist Matrix, rolled into the prospect of our future.

Corporate fascism that is now fast being realized under our very own prez, our very own congress, our very own justice, judicial and our very own eyes for those who can still see beyond the propaganda, dumb show and noise.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

140. Civil War is the Path to Unity?!

Oh dear...

[Roland99]

*sigh*

so sad to see so many up here at DU that just don't freakin' get it.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

145. And you would be one of them....

Divide the party. Kick out at least half of its members.

And you're going to win an election.....how?

You would do to the Democratic Party what the Tea Partiers are currently doing to the Republicans. It's funny when it happens to them, not so much when it happens to us.

[Name removed]

166. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

168. Are you fucking serious?

The only way to unite the party is to slap the shit out of the DLCers.

You don't think that would tend to cause the DLCers to leave the party? You don't find that even a teensy bit divisive?

[Roland99]

172. what *I* find divisive is a large group of so-called Democrats that put Profits Over People

That should be their motto.

Whatever matters most to corporations, special interests, and the big-time campaign donors is all that matters to them.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

173. So lemme get this straight...

You'd rather LOSE elections and get precisely ZERO portion of your agenda enacted, rather than compromise with other interest groups in order to get PART of your agenda enacted.

Am I hearing you correctly? We should drive out the corporate interests (however vaguely that might be defined) and push them into the loving embrace of the Republican Party. We should simply surrender anywhere from 5 - 10% of our electoral advantage in order to maintain ideological purity.

That's what you're recommending?

[Roland99]

174. Since you're being intentionally obtuse (like others up here), I won't bother with you anymore.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

185. I'm obtuse?

Since you don't seem to understand the meaning of the word "divisive," I'm pretty sure you don't know the meaning of the word "obtuse," either

[liquid diamond]

11. How sensible of him. Fucking woodchuck.

:sarcasm:

[zipplewrath]

12. Who's "We"?

Kinda hard to unite when you're being marginalized.

[socialist_n_TN]

15. But,, but, but I thought we were SUPPOSED to

hold his feet to the fire and that change comes from the bottom up. Then why have we become marginalized when we were merely doing what we were supposed to do?

[Chulanowa]

139. Bitching and moaning on the internet isn't "holding his feet to the fire"

[socialist_n_TN]

17. I would prefer someone with a little more

charisma than Rep. Kucinich. Unfortunately, the Dem with the most charisma IS Obama.

The ideal situation, IMO, would be for a primary challenge by somebody like Grayson or maybe Sherrod Brown that just BARELY fails. That MIGHT move Obama leftwards.

[NorthCarolina]

21. If Obama has a challenger and is forced to actually campaign

he will absolutely move left.....for the campaign. It's the DLC SOP...campaign left, govern right.

[TheEuclideanOne]

27. I hope he gives us Canadian healthcare and gets rid of that darn Pentagon.

Just suggesting some campaign ideas. :)

[NorthCarolina]

141. He might

because after the election he can forget about it. Anything is fair game in "campaign mode", where you say what the "little people" want to hear. I know he was all about a Public Option to give the insurance company's "competition" during the last campaign. After the election he didn't say a peep during the first year when Congress was hashing out the health insurance reform legislation which, needless to say, didn't have a public option. Campaign rhetoric is just that....rhetoric.

[valerief]

25. Charisma doesn't end wars, doesn't create jobs, doesn't provide healthcare for all,

doesn't protect social security. Fuck charisma.

Just my two cents.

BTW, I love Grayson, love Brown. However, nothing they say or do will change Obama. He's got a plan and he's sticking with it. We can take it or leave it or, most likely, have to live with it despite what we want.

[Frisbee]

26. Or succeeds. n/t

[backtomn]

79. It may not be the popular thing to say here, but.....

how about someone that might actually get a few more votes than Kucinich. I don't think his primary run, with 1% of the vote, is going to make one bit of difference.....one way or the other. There are a lot of DUers that like what he stands for, but apparently, almost none of them voted for him in the primaries.

The important thing to note here is that a President running for re-election, that is challenged in the primary, generally loses in the general election......recent examples....Ford, Carter, Bush 43.

That approach is not likely to help us.

[Freddie Stubbs]

19. Kucinich also promised during his 2006 reelection campaign that he would not run for President in 08

He may change his tune again after he is reelected in November.

[Bluenorthwest]

38. Please. Get real.

Senator Obama also promised Illinois he would not run for President in 08, having barely landed in the Senate. He changed his mind because he saw a path to victory. That is a good reason to change your mind, but if promise breaking is a taint to a politician, both DK and Obama broke the no run in 08 pledge, if DK made such a pledge, I do not recall. I assume you are accurate, and that meanst they both ran when they said they would not. Kind of a wash out, wouldn't you say?

[Freddie Stubbs]

50. I'm not criticizing him for it. I'm just trying to put this story in its proper context

[Kingofalldems]

53. Freepers and republicans hate Kucinich

And never miss a chance to go after him.

[Desertrose]

54. As do some "dems" here on DU , too.

AS proven by so many "pile on" DK threads.

[MineralMan]

67. And, yet, here he is, supporting party unity.

He's a good man. He knows that without party unity, we get the Republicans. Smart man.

[Kingofalldems]

73. Yes, that was my point

:hi:

[Desertrose]

151. Figured ....

;)

:hi:

[Enthusiast]

152. See post 53. nt

[John Agar]

76. He's showing more maturity and common sense than Gibbs did in insulting him.

Which is worth noting.

[Enthusiast]

153. +1 nt

[Freddie Stubbs]

198. He wasn't criticizing Kucinich, he was criticizing those who would want Kucinich as President

[Zorra]

200. He insulted a substantial segment of the base

of the Democratic Party. Not just those that voted for Rep. Kucinich in the presidential primaries, but also those that believed he would make a good president, but did not vote for him in the primaries because they believed he had little chance of becoming president. How does Gibbs know that we would not be satisfied if Dennis were President? At least we'd know someone would be advocating for democracy.

[John Agar]

203. Which is an insult to Rep. Kucinich.

When you insult his (purported) supporters, you insult Kucinich too.

[TheCowsCameHome]

22. No surprises there. n/t

[laughingliberal]

23. Yeah, I think it was pointed out here, yesterday, that Kucinich will not challenge a sitting

Democratic President. And many of us have been trying to come together for the purposes of getting out of Afghanistan and working towards programs leading to full employment (which Kucinich also talked about in the interview).

He showed himself gracious and focused on the issues. No wonder so many admire him.

[Bluenorthwest]

28. Come together to end war. Not a new message for Dennis

Anyone who is familiar with his work, or has paid attention even since 08 would know that Dennis would not primary President Obama. The notion was always foolish, and foisted by his foes, not his supporters, by and large. Just yesterday I read on DU that Progressives all backed Dennis in the Primary, but Dennis was only in one primary, one caucuss, and then handed it over to Senator Obama. He gave his support to Barack Obama before Joe Biden did, before Dodd, before any of them. Those who dislike Dennis forget this, those who like him recall this. It was the endorsement of Rep Kucinich that got me and millions of others on board for Obama earlier than the general. Yes, I was Obama Primary voter. I saw great similarities between him and Clinton, and in such a case, I always go with the 'new guy'. Not a fan of family chains of power, so I went with Obama.
And another point I think is important regarding DU and Dennis. Here today, a quote we can all talk about, untiy for Peace. But for many months now, Dennis has been trashed here on DU, his reputation sullied, OPs attackikng him were constant during the health care debates-Dennis of course voted for it, while DUers slandered him repeatedly.
I just think that many who might wish to speak of this quote, and point to the wisdom Dennis provides will be hindered by the fact that they have spent so much time calling him the UFO Keebler Elf. They call him 'unelectable' but he has won many elections.
The Professional Centrists, from Gibbs to Kos have beaten up on Dennis in the press, called out his supporters on TV, and in general made his current words far less impactful.
I'm thinking of several specific DUers, who will like what he says today, because it is election time talk. They will probably post this just as they posted their hatred toward him. Some of them have refused repeatedly to say that they so much as support him over the Republican in Ohio's 10th. I'd name names, but that is not professional, I'm doing the Gibbs method, 'some say'. Because of the rules. And to be polite. But they are here, they posted so many anti-Dennis threads, and I told them all they were trashing a strong supporter for sport. Oh, they say, Dennis is short. He's funny looking. His wife is younger!
So duh, Dennis isn't running. Anyone who thought he would is not well informed and was simply using him as rheorical fodder.

[4lbs]

30. I'd rather see Kucinich try to become a U.S. Senator.

There have been several threads talking about how we need more Progressive Senators.

So.... Kucinich.

[blondeatlast]

43. Indeed. nt

[JaneFordA]

33. Wow

I'm really disappointed here and must respectfully disagree with Dennis on this one. What I really want to see is:

1) Obama resign today and hand it all over to Joe Biden
2) Sometime within the next six months, Biden declare he has no intention of seeking a term himself in order to throw the primary wide open.
3) Then it'll be up to us to get behind one candidate immediately so as not to squander time and resources and prepare to kick some butt.

[yowzayowzayowza]

34. "Obama resign today"

:rofl:

K&R

[BootinUp]

36. LOL, oh dear, there is just no limit

to the crazee is there?

[flamingdem]

35. You and most republicans would like to see this!

Dream on.

[MineralMan]

39. You forgot your Sarcasm smiley there.

[dmallind]

42. Yes - that's the path to party unity and pregress! Oh dear..... NT

[blondeatlast]

44. Oh, my goodness! You're good--I'm LOLing and haven't even finished

my coffee yet!

[bitchkitty]

47. Drinking at 7:53 a.m.? Shame on you. n/t

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jaxx]

62. Isn't that being negative towards the President?

[patrice]

37. Now THERE'S the Real Left.

Thank you, Dennis.

And thank God for those like you who actually know what's going on.

[MineralMan]

40. +10

[blondeatlast]

45. Well said. nt

[Deep13]

48. I bet that's load off Obama's mind. nt

[ZM90]

52. I like Dennis and he's right on target with what he is saying rec!

[Name removed]

55. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MineralMan]

70. Was it ever going to be otherwise for you?

[SocialistLez]

100. If a wortwhile candidate from the Dems challenged Obama, I'd vote for him or her.

[MineralMan]

102. Can you name one, please? Who would you consider to be a

"wortwhile: candidate? Which Democrat would you vote for? Thanks.

[SocialistLez]

201. Kucinich, Grayson...

I'm voting Dem in my state's congressional race.
Of course this is because a Green Party candidate is not running for my district.

I'm voting Green for the Senate race. I refuse to vote for a corporate whore and anti-union candidate like Blanche Lincoln.

[Overseas]

60. K&R! //nt

[zappaman]

61. good

cuz he doesn't have a prayer of ever becoming president.
for the majority of america, the presidential race has become like america's next top model and dk will be vilified as looking goofy and as having goofy views and the republican lapdogs will eat it up.

[John Agar]

63. It's too early to take this seriously. nt.

[KansDem]

68. He was my choice in 2008...he'd be my choice in 2012...

We need to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan
We need a public-financed public option for health care
We need a federal jobs program
We need to return to a progressive tax rate
We need to hold banks and Wall Street accountable for their malfeasance and fraud
We need to hold BushCo accountable for their lies and torture...

We have a lot to do...

[K8-EEE]

77. Please, as IF he had a chance in hell of winning!

It's like the freepers pulling for Duncan Hunter. There's no way! I like DK but I want him where he will have the most impact -- in congress, not running a losing and divisive prez campaign.

[zappaman]

83. exactly n/t

[defendandprotect]

122. We need someone to challenge Obama's corporatist agenda .... Kucinich could do it ...

in a primary -- and I hope to hell we have a huge number of liberal/progressive

Dems standing up to do it -- and Grayson would have my vote in a second!!

AND MY $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[lib2DaBone]

88. Grayson/Kucinich 2012

[SocialistLez]

101. I'd vote for that ticket. NT

[defendandprotect]

118. They'd have my vote -- also Whitehouse, Feingold, and a number of others!! STEP UP Dems!!

[NorthCarolina]

143. I wish. eom

[Kermitt Gribble]

90. Sounds to me

like this is a message to Gibbs and the Obama Administration that they need to unite with the Left instead of belittling and ignoring on almost every instance.

[Althaia]

94. I'm tempted to write Kucinich in, in the 2012 dem primary...

...as a statement of no confidence. (Of course I'd vote for Obama in the election - unfortunately, there is no other realistic choice.

[bc3000]

95. Sorry Dennis, I'm voting for you anyway.

[sui generis]

97. well I'm part of the professional left, so I'm not voting.

It's the only thing we professional lefties can do to make Obama wake up and fire Gibbs, and if not, well, so be it. There is a price for everything, including inaction.

[NJmaverick]

99. Rep Kucinich certainly got this one right

the question is will his followers now abandon him and his calls for party unity

[ProSense]

103. Howard Dean

weighs in

[defendandprotect]

119. Politicians have been known to change their minds ... Bobby Kennedy, for one... finally ran....

[mvd]

105. I respect Dennis's decision. Hopefully the President will..

do better in the polls and we won't need to discuss a primary challenge. I will miss Dennis's voice during the debates, though. I think if everyone didn't try to shut out the left, Dennis's message would resonate.

[Phlem]

106. Really?

"I think what we have to do is focus on coming together for the purposes of getting out of Iraq and Afghanistan," Didn't we do that when Obama got elected, and then we slowly got pissed on at every important juncture.

Whatever, and the next person to think I'm going GOP cause of Obama, really? Pull your heads out of your collective asses.

One thing I'm not going to do is applaud someone who's trashing me!

Unlike the blindly following group of cheerleaders around hear.

Wake up people and know when your getting sidelined and made irrelevant.

-p

[NeedleCast]

108. And with a few exceptions, the majority of Democrats collectivly say...

Duh.

[defendandprotect]

117. Love Dennis and he's done more than his share of trying to help us ... BUT ...

we do need a liberal/progressive to contest this right wing corporate agenda

pouring out of the White House -- and a primary is the way to do it.

This administration needs some real challenging -- and we need to keep moving to the LEFT --

WE BEGAN THIS MOVEMENT IN '06 . . . AND WE NEED TO KEEP PUSHING TO THE LEFT --

[ProgressOnTheMove]

121. I did support DK first, it just takes a lot of money to beat President Barack Obama. He's the ..

President and candidate for 2012. It's unrealistic to think anything else. Even with all our disagreements it would be unproductive to think anything else.

[totodeinhere]

127. I think that only ones who would have a chance against Obama in the 2012

primaries are Clinton or Dean. And neither of them have shown any interest so far.

[stopbush]

130. Boy, I'll bet Obama is breathing a sigh of relief now that his main challenger has opted out

of running.

:sarcasm:

[Joey Liberal]

134. I would vote for Kucinich or Hillary over Obama

I guess I'm a part of the professional left. I've had enough of Gibbs and the rest of the spineless wimps in the Obama admin.

[bkozumplik]

136. Did he say, "I wont challenge Obama"?

Because I dont see that quoted.

edit: watched the interview. yeah thats what he said. darn.

[Greyhound]

137. Duh. Whoever said he would? n/t

[LWolf]

138. I never expected him to. nt

[DFLforever]

157. Whoever thought he would?

except the delusional....His only challenge will come from the right/Republicans...

[EFerrari]

190. Nobody.

LOL

[Scurrilous]

159. Good news MineralMan.

K & R :thumbsup:

[Ken Burch]

160. Dennis knows the party insiders would crush him

And that their apologists here would cheer them on as they did.

Who needs the aggro?

[DCBob]

179. Does that mean all the idiotic "Kooch for Prez" stuff will end on DU?

sure hope so... its such a waste of bandwidth and board space.

[Ken Burch]

180. Thank you for proving my point!

n/t.

[DCBob]

182. What point??

your post appears utterly pointless.

[Ken Burch]

183. The point that some people here will slap down anything even vaguely-Kucinich related

Your insistence on dissing Dennis' supporters and any talk of him running again, despite the fact that you had no reason to do so, is what proved that particular point.

Dennis Kucinich has never been the enemy of the Democratic Party, and he DID vote for the watered-down healthcare bill in the end, so you have no reason to feel any resentment towards him.

[DCBob]

186. primarying Obama is idiotic.. even DK knows that..

when will his supporters realize it?

[Ken Burch]

187. They might be more likely to realize it if people like you wouldn't keep taunting them about it.

And, given that Dennis has said he won't...can't you just leave it at that?

[eridani]

189. I'm one of his strongest supporters, and I agree with him

Run for the office too many times and people just start talking about Harold Stassen.

[EFerrari]

191. Dennis is up for re-election and this story is plain bs

that pretends to clear up a controversy when there was none.

Must be a slow week.

[EFerrari]

192. I must have missed all those stories about Dennis running

as well as all those threads where DUers begged him to run.

LOL

[depakid]

194. He's the conservadem's strawman and whipping boy

If Obama's approval numbers are in the low 40's or 30's 15 months from now, we may well see a serious challenger- or a third party movement- though it wasn't ever likey to have involved Kuchinich.

[EFerrari]

195. Of course. Even after he came through in Iowa and before the

health insurance bail-out vote. Really bad form to back stab someone like Dennis.