From Kucinich to Edwards. Goodbye good friend, my heart aches.

[Truth2Tell]

Something I believe:

I believe Dennis Kucinich is a great man. I believe he's honest and hard working and sincere. I believe he's right on more issues than anyone else in the U.S. Congress, bar none. He gives me and millions of others a voice in a body where minority views have little voice. He speaks more otherwise unspoken truths on most days then the entire Democratic leadership does in most full years. He is without question the Presidential candidate who's positions most closely mesh with my own - by a long shot. And until now he has held my unwavering support in his quest for the Democratic nomination.

Something else I believe:

I believe that in politics we sometimes have to choose between the least objectionable, yet viable options. If I didn't believe this I wouldn't be a Democrat to begin with. But I am - and have been for 20 plus years. I believe that politics is the art of the possible. Of course, many things are possible and necessary which transcend Presidential nomination fights. And in our present political system Presidential nomination fights can and should be vehicles for much more than the simple selection of a candidate. I understand these things and they are always a part of my thinking. And yet - ultimately - the outcome is paramount.

What I have decided:

I have come to the conclusion that Dennis Kucinich is not viable this time around. His has always been a long shot bid - but I've felt there was at least some hope. Today I crossed my personal Rubicon. The reasons are many, and I won't relate them all. Suffice it say, his machinations regarding Obama and Edwards are a factor. His campaign organization this time around is a factor. His polling traction another. Many things. But bottom line for me - no longer viable.

I should make clear that I don't think Dennis isn't viable because of Dennis. In a world where elections were free and fair the errors and missteps of the Kucinich campaign would simply be bumps in the road - like the errors and missteps of the rest of the field. But in America elections are not free, and they're not fair. And that's the hand we hold and the hand we must play if we choose to play at all.

This post is already way too long - so short story - I'm now supporting Edwards and will work for him hard in the run up to my local caucuses.

Dennis is still one of my political heroes. But John Edwards is not bad, as viable candidates in America go.

Dennis will remain in my signature line.

This has not been easy, but politics never is when you really believe in change.

Go Edwards!!!!

[eridani]

1. Are you in a caucus state or not?

If you are, please stick with Kucinich. Otherwise, I get where you are coming from.

[Truth2Tell]

4. I am in a caucus state

but I think there is more to the process than just caucus day. I think Edwards needs the help between now and then to beat Hill and Bama. I will be door belling my precinct and a number of others, and I will be tracking supporters of both DK and JE and encouraging them both to attend, as well as other uncommitted leftists.

I hear you eridani, and I will never let go of the Kucinich message. But I have made what I think is the best call I can.

[eridani]

21. A lot will depend on what has happened by the time of the higher level caucuses

If Edwards needs the support to stay viable, then his supporters must caucus for him. Otherwise, go Kucinich.

[Kucinich4America]

5. I was just about to post the same thing.

And I see the OP is from Washington, which is a caucus state.

So as one Washingtonian to another, I would urge you to stand for Dennis. If he doesn't have enough support in your precinct, you have Edwards as a backup. If it comes down to your single vote putting Edwards over a much less desirable (*cough* Hillary *cough*) candidate, then I could understand switching early.

It's an unfortunate reality that Dennis probably won't be the nominee. But there's another reality that cannot be ignored. And that's that the values Dennis represents ARE the values which made the Democratic party great, and which made this country great, and if John Edwards or Barack Obama eventually emerges as the nominee, they need to understand that WE are not going away, and that WE are America, not the corporations and the lobbyist whores. And the only way to convey that message is that Kucinich people show up for the fight AS Kucinich people, not switching horses.

[Truth2Tell]

8. I can push Kucinich values

as an Edwards delegate. I actually believe that will be the most effective route to having my voice - and those values - heard in this process.

[gateley]

11. As someone who just had my candidate go down in flames at the Iowa caucus,

I urge you to caucus for Dennis. Follow your heart. If you're right and he's not viable, then you'll at least know you were true to your heart and you did the right thing. Although I somewhat understand the caucus process, it would have made those of us observing feel much better seeing our fellow supporters standing strong in their beliefs.

Just my unsolicited opinion. :hi:

[Truth2Tell]

16. unsolicited opinion

Yours is one I much respect. Please consider it to be solicited always. :hi:

[Snotcicles]

35. "A wise man is not bound by his principals"

Emphasize bound. I too like and respect Dennis Kicinich but I believe John Edwards can accomplish more with his skills and determination.

[melody]

2. Wonderful post -- even though I'm much more of an Edwards fan, I honor your process

And I thought it was well-stated.

[Tesha]

41. We've made exactly the same decision in the Tesha household.

We've given (substantial) money to Dennis.

We'd love to vote for Dennis.

If we had Instant Runoff Voting, we'd absolutely give
Dennis our first choice on the ballot.

But we don't have IRV, wo we need to vote a bit more
strategically and that points us to Edwards.

Tesha

[nannah]

58. me too!

I was a Kucinich delegate in 2004 and i have supported his campaign fiinancially. I agree with most of his positions.

but this time around i will caucus for Edwards and donate regularly to his campaign. To me, both his heart and his skills will make him one of our best ever presidents!

[harmonicon]

3. I wish there was an anti-recommend button

This sort of shit reasoning is why democracy is dead in america.

[Truth2Tell]

6. While, if I weren't willing to play

the "lessor of evils" game then I wouldn't be a Democrat to begin with. I'd just vote Green or work only outside the system. But once I cross the threshold and agree to participate in our rigged game (which most of us here have done), then I'm going to play to affect the outcome as best I can.

[harmonicon]

7. if you make a compromise in the primaries, you're not playing a rigged game

you're one of the people rigging the game.

[Truth2Tell]

10. If a tight race is underway between two or three

candidates and I support another who is not in play, then I'm not in the game at all - I'm on the sidelines - and so are the values I wish to represent.

[harmonicon]

12. beat the geek?

This isn't a game. That's the problem. Metaphor doesn't really work here. This is a democracy. When your mom said, "If all of your friends jumped off of a bridge, would you?", did you say, "yeah!"?

[Truth2Tell]

15. Like I've said, if I followed your logic

I wouldn't vote at all.

[harmonicon]

19. and my logic is:

primaries are pointless if we let the corporate media and choose our candidates for us. If there was only one "front runner" and all the other candidates were "second tier", would you vote for the "front runner"? That's where your reasoning leads.

[Truth2Tell]

22. In your example

my vote wouldn't affect the outcome of a race between front runners. I'm simply using the same logic I used when I held my nose and voted for Gore over Nader. I know that not everyone agrees with that choice, but in my judgment it did the least harm.

[harmonicon]

24. I voted for Gore over Nader, because he would have made a better president.

Call me crazy, but that's the way I work.

[drm604]

68. Corporate Media.

In all respect, supporting Edwards is not "letting the corporate media choose our candidate". The corporate media is very obviously attempting to shut Edwards out.

[Breeze54]

17. I will vote for Kucinich in the primary but I'm

hoping to be voting for Edwards as the nominee.

I do understand the OP's position though.

I've been wrestling with the same thing since last night.

[harmonicon]

27. Did you watch the Kucinich interview with Bill Moyers?

He didn't make any direct statements, but he seemed to be indicating what I've always felt: Edwards' populism is only rhetoric. Look at his voting record. Of the "top 3", Edwards would be my last choice, and I would take Kucinich, Gravel or Richardson over any of them.

[eridani]

31. Maybe, maybe not

Might it just be possible that Edwards got the same lesson from officially "losing" that Al Gore did? Might he have decided as a result to quit being safe and get more real?

I'll admit that I can't really tell one way or another, but dammit, even if it is 100% pandering, at least Edwards is pandering to ME this time instead of to a bunch of homophobic shitstains!

[harmonicon]

32. I'll admit that I'd like to be wrong

I think it would be great if Edwards had really had a change of heart, but I have yet to hear him really say so or disavow himself from his senate record. It was a shame that Gore wasn't more honest about how left-wing he really is when he ran for president, but that's in the past - I'd rather judge candidates by their history than their campaign. Eventually the campaign stops and governing has to happen.

[eridani]

37. OK, tell me who the real Al Gore is

Is it the overmanaged, cautious 2000 version who would not fight for his win? Or is it the inconvenient firebrand of 2007?

[harmonicon]

47. well, he's not Bill Clinton - we know that

He definitely isn't the cautious everything-to-everyone politician of 2000, trying to coast into office on Clinton's legacy. I could see it then, and some others could, but he should have ran on that. He's more like the firebrand of 2007, I would imagine, but not knowing the guy personally I can't really say.

[eridani]

64. OK, now apply the same reasoning to Edwards n/t

[never_get_over_it]

43. I don't think John Edwards has had a change of heart

I think he has had a change of head - I think a lot of what he did in the Senate went against his heart - but he followed his head and listened to political advisers who gave him bad advice. My understanding is he wanted to vote against IWR and apparently Elizabeth was VERY opposed to it - but political advisers told him he was too much of a junior Senator to vote NO. I believe MANY of the Dems who voted for IWR did so more for political calculation than anything else.

I believe/hope that Edwards is now following his heart. And if he is pandering then worse case he would be just about the same as the other two. And like it or not Edwards, Obama and Clinton are our only real choices.

BTW I also believe with all my heart that if Obama had been in the Senate at the time of the IWR vote he would have fallen victim of these idiot advisers and voted yes too - or maybe he just wouldn't have voted as he did in the Kyl LIEberman Iran vote - and to me not voting is worse than voting YES. But the truth is I'll never know for sure how he would have voted.

[harmonicon]

46. Yeah, we can't really know for sure.

I hope you're right about Edwards following his convictions now. What frightens me is that it seems that he was willing to make such an important vote for politically calculated reasons (as were dozens of other senators). To me, that's just as bad as if he'd voted 'yes' because he thought that it was the right thing to do. Either scenario is troubling. If he did that political reasons, why wouldn't he now have a more leftist message, because that's how the tide is turning in our country? If he really is a hawk (something I suspect), I don't know what would make him change if he takes office. I don't know what to say about Obama's recent votes.... 'cowardly' doesn't seem to go far enough as an explanation. I'm just not fond of any of the current or former senators running now, apart from Gravel (though he was in the senate from before I was born to when I was a little kid, so I don't know too much about his record).

[never_get_over_it]

54. You're right

we can't really be sure - but I don't know what else we can do - these are the candidates we have to choose from - and I do believe that no matter how much we are suspicious of them they can't be any worse than that POS that is there now or any of those fools that are running on the other side - and I'm betting they will be WAY BETTER.....

[harmonicon]

62. well, if Michigan's primary meant anything, I'd vote Kucinich

I really don't think he holds his positions to get votes. I'm as close to 100% sure of it as I can be. Yeah, any Democrat would be better than who we have now - I'm not disputing that. However, I do think that we'd be better off with someone who doesn't play politics so much. I think that person is Kucinich. I also like Gravel and Richardson. Richardson's probably too right-wing for my tastes in a lot of respects, but I don't think he has anything up his sleeve either. He seems to be an honest man with a good explanation for his stances on issues.

[Breeze54]

33. I admire them too but they aren't winning at this point....

At least Edwards did apologize... twice!! But I still have about a month to see what happens.

But come hell or high water, I'm going to make sure we have a Democrat in the White House in Jan. 2009!!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/04/AR2007020400892.html">Edwards Again Says He Was Wrong to Vote for War

[Naturyl]

23. Yeah, exactly

If principles were all that mattered, I'd be a Green myself. But winning also matters - because having a halfway decent party in power (the Dems) is better than a horrible one (the GOP).

Principles do count for a hell of alot. But pragmatism matters, too. Walking that fine line is tough, and I totally respect this person's decision. I was about to make the same decision myself. I reconsidered, but it's a very tough call either way.

[NanceGreggs]

25. And your sort of shit reasoning ...

... is why we threw the tea in the harbour.

[Skittles]

29. I find it disconcerting

other people don't like him, so I won't vote for him either

[Tesha]

42. The problem is that Dennis won't be the nominee; the nominee will be one of the top three.

The problem is that Dennis won't be the Democratoc nominee;
the nominee will be one of the top three.

o One of those top-three candidates absolutely sucks and will,
IMNSHO, lose the General Election for us.

o Another of thise top-three candidates mostly sucks and may,
IMNSHO, lose the General Election for us.

o And one of those top-three candidates is pretty-much acceptable
to me and has polled *AS A WINNER* in the General Election
against any of the top-running Republican candidates.

Given that, it is *MY DUTY* to try to support the one candidate
in the top three who is acceptable to me*AND* who can actually
win in the General Election. And that candidate is Edwards.

Tesha

[Two Americas]

56. acceptable

We ask which candidate is acceptable to us.

Which candidate finds us acceptable?

We ask which candidate we should support.

Which candidate will support us?

We ask which candidate deserves our time and effort.

Which candidate thinks that all of us deserve their time and effort?

The Edwards candidacy is turning all of our political thinking upside down, and it is about time that happened.

[Skittles]

60. I vote for the best person for the job PERIOD

end of story - if everyone did that DENNIS WOULD BE PRESIDENT

[Truth2Tell]

73. Not true Skittles.

Because most people will never know about Dennis Kucinich. If (a) everyone was allowed to learn about all of the candidates and then (b) everyone voted for the best person for the job, then Dennis would be President. But we don't have (a) thanks to a corrupt system, so (b) doesn't really mean anything.

[Individualist]

85. Ditto!

It's a pity other people don't vote in their best interests, instead letting MSM determine their votes.

[crikkett]

9. you start off losing when you assume that you can't have what you want, even in the primaries

You throw your vote away when you vote against your own interests.

Edwards and Clinton KNEW that the intelligence supporting war in Iraq was false when they voted to authorize war, says Dick Durbin, because they sat on the Senate Intelligence Committee with Durbin and the Intelligence Cte knew the truth but wasn't allowed to tell us. Durbin voted against authorizing an Iraq invasion, by the way, because even though he couldn't disclose what he knew he could act on it.

I'm going to vote my conscience -- therefore my vote goes to the one person who has shown to vote his -- and that would be Dennis Kucinich.

[Truth2Tell]

13. True, I start off losing

but the fact is that in our present system we all start off losing. I have simply acknowledged that and am working to push the values I hold - anti-war, anti-imperialism, pro-social justice - as effectively as I think I can. Our electoral system is sick and I'm simply working within the reality that it's not going to be healed in the next month, as hard as I might try or wish.

[crikkett]

83. (self-edit and valid question)

So.... I saw that Edwards came in 2nd!! Did you stand for him after all? What was it like?

[cyclezealot]

38. Dont trust Edwards.

We knew the Iraq INtelligence was lies. Sen. Bob Graham , the Senate Intelligence chair in 2002 , told Edwards the Bush war lies were lies. Yet, Edwards sided and lobbyied with Joe Lieberman. A leopard does not change his spots. I'll stick with someone I know is not in need of a lie detector test to assure us of his real intentions.

[1awake]

14. I guess it depends

on where your loyalties lay. Are you loyal to your beliefs and ideals, or are you more loyal to the person. If you view the best method of causing change.. of achieving your goals.. beliefs.. ideals, by switching to another candidate who's election you view as more viable, then you have done nothing wrong. You can only work within the system that is presented, until the system can be reworked. Do what you think is best.

[Naturyl]

18. I understand and respect your reasoning.

I was ready to do the same thing yesterday. But Kucinich's e-mail today had a different effect on me. It reminded me that Dennis isn't going to stop fighting to give me a voice even when the situation looks hopeless, so the least I can do is keep fighting for him.

Dennis won't even be on the primary ballot in my state, so Edwards has my vote. By Kucinich will continue to have moral support and my activism. And my avatar will continue to say "Dennis Kucinich For President" until we have an official nominee.

[NanceGreggs]

20. Beautifully stated.

Although I was a Kucinich fan, and will always be such, I knew he wasn't "viable" from day one.

But that doesn't change the fact that he has been a "winner" from the beginning. By raising certain questions, he forced the other candidates to respond to issues they might have preferred to ignore. By introducing the cold tone of reality into the political discussion, he caused the other candidates to warm up to reality. By speaking up for the average American, he challenged others to take up their cause in no uncertain terms.

I am confident that a Democrat will be in the White House come January '09 -- and Dennis Kucinich will have been a major player in getting them there.

Some politicians win or lose as the votes are cast - others are just plain winners, come what may.

DK is one of that rare breed whose worth is proven, time and again, not by the count of the votes, but by the impact of their ability to raise the discussion to new heights, and inspire the best in all of us.

[Two Americas]

26. support both

It doesn't need to be all or nothing. Support and promote both and then make a tactical decision as to how you vote when the time comes. As eridani says, if you are in a caucus state, stick with Dennis.

Edwards is giving us (finally!) an opportunity to all be on the same team. Breathe deep. Things are going to start to happen now. We have a chance to help the people regain control over the party and the country. The Democratic party is coming back to life. There are a few who are resisting this, but most of the people in the party and the country want to wrest control of that party and the country away from the super-wealthy special interests and the insiders and the power-brokers and highly paid fund-raisers and over-rated consultants and unethical pr firms.

Don't think of it as the Edwards camp - it is the people's camp.

[Truth2Tell]

53. Exactly. Thanks Two. n/t

[Oeditpus Rex]

28. I'll support Kucinich until it's moot

I don't see the point in giving up on a candidate when he's still a candidate, regardless of his "viability."

I also didn't stop pulling for the Dodgers last September when they were 13 games out. I did, however, decide which contending club I wanted to win the NL West and the playoff scenario I wanted to see. Accordingly, when Kucinich is no longer a candidate, I'll give my support to someone who is.

[Didereaux]

30. I have a problem with the top three concerning Kucinich...

I think they are all three of them slimeballs of the lowest sort for not coming to bat for Kucinich about his exclusion from the debates. Kucinich was just as viable and most certainly better qualified than Richardson. But the bastards, particularly Obama who claims to be so goddam almighty inclusive and a uniter(how that makes me want to puke when I here him or anyone say that word...it's Bushes word forever, he slimed it and now owns it) failed to support arguably at this point someone who was no threat. Screw 'em.

[Naturyl]

36. I agree completely.

Richardson is nowhere. He has no support and no chance. And yet he was there. Kucinich should have been there,too.

[Adelante]

40. Obama defended the excluded Dems over the NH debate

As did Clinton. It was EDWARDS who REFUSED to defend Kucinich's right to speak at the debate. Edwards didn't want to get involved.

"The voters of New Hampshire deserve to hear all the Democratic candidates' views on who can best lead America in a fundamentally new direction, and that's why I urge these networks to allow full participation in this week's debate," Obama said in a statement.

But in an interview with UnionLeader.com, John Edwards said he is staying out of the issue.

"I don't get to set the rules for the debates. I'll let the people who are in charge of the debates set the rules. And I'll be there," Edwards said.

http://unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=Clinton%2c+Obama%3a+Include+all+of+us&articleId=491c03d9-f9e1-4653-9688-7c0a0a9731ef


The big fighter man.

And last summer it was EDWARDS whispering in Clinton's ear to make the debates smaller. Too bad Kucinich heard.

[tchunter]

89. kucinich is in no way more qualified than bill richardson n/t

[silverojo]

34. Thanks for your support, and welcome aboard - n/t

[MadHound]

39. People like yourself are part of the reason that Kucinich loses

People who think that he isn't viable, that he can't win, that he won't get the votes. You've seen it around here, people who state that they would vote for Kucinich except they think he can't win. Guess what? Kucinich could and would win if people like yourself would actually go out and work and vote for him rather than giving into despair, the bullshit MSM, and the "conventional wisdom"! You maudalin post is nothing more than a pitiful attempt at rationalizing why you've decided to go with somebody you think is a "winner".

Sorry, but I think that you're selling out, and selling out cheap. Not only are you supporting the latest flavor of the month, you're also now supporting a man who has nicked his platform from Dennis, using a faux populist schtick this time around because the moderate part of the field is already too crowded. You are also supporting a man who can't make the promise that he'll have troops completely out of Iraq by the end of his first term, a candidate who is corporately compromised by both Wall St financiers and by the legal sector. His policies, despite his fireeating rhetoric, are no more left than any of the moderate pabulum positions put out by Clinton and Obama. Oh, and don't forget, he is a charter member of the DLC.

If you want Kucinich in office, then work and vote for the man. Don't go off supporting some faux populist just because he is the latest thing, because he will wind up disappointing you in the end.

[Naturyl]

45. Isn't it good that the "mainstream" is taking cues from DK's platform?

Personally, I think that's a very good thing. And it shows once again that DK is an exteremly important voice whether or not he gets the nomination.

[Truth2Tell]

52. I haven't given in to the despair

I've simply made a strategic retreat. Sometimes that's best for the long term. I don't think I'm the reason dennis doesn't win. I think the fact that millions of Americans will never even know what Dennis Kucinich stands for is why he can't win. It's like fielding three players against a full football team. It's a fool's errand. It makes more sense to work in the off-season to change the rules.

[Two Americas]

57. Dennis did win

Not sure what you have been seeing, but as far as I am concerned Kucinich, and all of us who have supported him over the years, did win. He kept the embers glowing through some dark nights. He probably is not ever going to be president, but it is a MSM-induced notion that this is the only way anyone can "win" and everyone else is a loser.

Kucinich is in office, by the way.

Edwards message is not the latest flavor of the month, it is the rock solid core of traditional Democratic party ideals and principles.

No one here is "selling out" or doing anything different than Dennis did when he endorsed Kerry and spoke for him and campaigned for him. This is politics, not religion. Purity of doctrine is not the goal. Alleviating the suffering of millions of people is the goal.

Edwards is creating a platform upon which everything that Dennis has fought for will now have a chance.

ALL of us are compromised one way or another by corrupt corporate capitalism. That is the nature of the beast - comply or starve; surrender or die. That is the problem.

Yes, Kucinich was right and so where those of us who supported him. But being right is the consolation prize in politics, and for too long we have settled for that. It has also become a convenient way for may to deny the full scope of the crisis, and to deny their own complicity in and acquiescence to a system that is rotten at all levels.

Edwards is far to the left of the other candidates and most Democratic party politicians where it matters - fighting for the traditional pro-labor stance of the Democratic party; fighting against entrenched and powerful interests on behalf of the poor and the everyday people.

And talking about it, and taking the message to the people IS accomplishing something no matter what else happens. Rallying and inspiring the people IS action, is walking the walk, is the job. "Oh sure he talks the talk but does he walk the walk" is a taunting and malicious right wing talking point, and one that has been used against every champion of the people since time began.

If the politician will talk the talk, WE will walk the walk. He says that he will be there with us. That is a Hell of a lot more than any other candidate has said in a long, long time. If he fails us, we go forward anyway, carrying the torches that he is lighting, spreading the message he is speaking.

[never_get_over_it]

44. I made the same decision last week

and I understand completely....

[flvegan]

48. As long as he's running, I'm standing behind Kucinch.

[Individualist]

49. I'll vote my best interests

DK all the way! MSM will NEVER determine my vote.

[Cleita]

50. I'm afraid you are right. He could have a Ralph Nader effect

in the primaries getting a DLC candidate nominated instead of a liberal/progressive by dividing those votes between candidates. I haven't make up my mind yet to switch to Edwards and probably won't before I have to cast my primary vote. It will be a very hard decision though as I feel Dennis Kucinich was not given an even and fair field to campaign in.

[Kurovski]

51. Kucinich and Edwards. My two guys.

K&R

[OzarkDem]

55. He really needs to focus on his Congressional race

the big money Republican business owners are backing a Dem city councilman to run against him. Cimperman has already raised a quarter million and will likely get more. The Plain Dealer is in full throttle trying to take Dennis' seat away.

I'm worried about the George Wallace wing of the Dem party in his district (Parma) trying to get him out of office.

[onehandle]

59. Kick! nt

[DaLittle Kitty]

61. K&R A Thoughtful and Wise Decision... Great Post! America Will Thank You!

:)

[DaLittle Kitty]

84. K&R

!

[Fox Mulder]

63. I'm not and will not give up on Kucinich.

As long as he is running, I will continue to contribute to his campaign and support his ideals.

[idiocracyhell]

66. Kucinich is electable if we all vote for him.

I hate to see people giving up on Kucinich so early in the race. He is the only candidate that has a single payer not-for-profit health care plan. We need this man in the White House. I like John Edwards, and he is my second choice in spite of his unethical dealings with Fortress. But John Edwards is a concession. I'm not willing to give up on our greatest candidate running, Dennis Kucinich.

[Fox Mulder]

67. Agreed.

[frog92969]

79. Haven't you heard?

It doesn't matter HOW many of us vote for Dennis, it just ain't happenin'.
So you might as well line up for the corporatocracy.

[idiocracyhell]

81. Welcome to Idiocracy where corporatocracy rules.

The American people are so quick to be sucked in by style vs substance. Obama has his smooth rhetoric, Edwards brings his passion, but Kucinich is pure moral substance. He is by far the greatest defender of our Constitution, and the candidate with the most integrity because he hasn't sold his soul to corporate America. I will always vote for principle over popularity. Ethics over celebrity hype. Kucinich '08 because he was right every time.

[colorado_ufo]

65. Well said.

We are truly fortunate to have two candidates of the quality of these two men.

[defendandprotect]

69. Nothing official on Dennis dropping out --- right ???

[Breeze54]

74. He is definately NOT dropping out! - He's a fighter!

;)

[defendandprotect]

87. Well, my point on this is that he's primarily the anti-war candidate? Do you agree?

And that he challenges the rest of them ---
We need to keep that situation going --
If Dennis dropped out, that end of the stick could drop --

[bvar22]

70. I made the same decision today.

for the same reasons.
It was not an easy decision.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3981150

The Democratic Party is a BIG TENT, but there is NO ROOM for those
who advance the agenda of THE RICH (Corporate Owners) at the EXPENSE of LABOR and the POOR.

[McCamy Taylor]

71. Like it or not, presidential elections are at least 70% personality contests.

Kucinich--like a lot of great political leaders before him--talks the talk and walks the walk but he does not have what it takes to get elected president in this country.

Obama is about 90% personality and he is the current front runner. Reagan was all personality and people remember him with fondness--even his demented years. Edwards is the candidate and not his wife, because Edwards is the one with the passion, she is the one with the ideas. America wants the passion.

[johncoby2]

72. WOW! What took you so long?

[Voltaire99]

75. Yes, Edwards isn't bad.

His populist cry would probably work much better if the nomination were being held a year from now, when we are likely to be in economic straits.

But there's still time for things to turn bad quickly, so he should hang on until the convention, if he can.

I like Dennis' posturing -- it is little more than that as he proved when he shamefully endorsed the war candidate, Kerry -- but as heroes go, I find him wanting. His heart's in the right place, and I suspect he could be much more useful outside the party.

[scarletwoman]

76. Welcome to the Kucinich-to-Edwards club. I became a member not too long ago.

I caucused for Kucinich in 2004 -- even had the chance to be a DK delegate to the national convention, but I couldn't afford it. I sent him more money than I have EVER spent in political contributions.

And here on DU I constantly argued that he WOULD be "viable" if all the people who said they agreed with him would vote for him. I'm pretty sure I've got that whole thing down.

But this time around, sticking with Kucinich is starting to feel a bit too much like pulling for Nader in 2000. Sure, "vote your hopes not your fears" is a great slogan -- been there, done that.

I've also noticed that all us Kucinich backers in 2004 had ZERO effect on the Democratic Party establishment. The oft repeated argument: "When they see how many of us are supporting Kucinich the party will HAVE to move to the Left!" really didn't seem to work very well, did it.

So, I've looked at the reality and assessed the chances of getting even a modicum of movement toward progressive values in this country, and it's clear to me that the over-riding priority HAS to be preventing either Ms. Status Quo or Mr. Audacity Of Hype from getting the Dem nomination.

Count me as another Kucinich lover switching to Edwards. I totally understand.

sw

[Extend a Hand]

77. I haven't decided what to do

Ohio primary isn't until March 4 so I'll just wait and see where things stand. If I don't vote for Dennis (my first choice) I'll either vote for Obama or Edwards.

[frog92969]

78. Pathetic!

I see the propaganda machine is extremely effective.

To surrender before the game's begun? Have we learned nothing?

[frog92969]

80. Was your candidate fooled, by George B*$h?

"Iraq's destructive capacity has the potential to throw the entire Middle East into chaos, and it poses a mortal threat to our vital ally, Israel. Thousands of terrorist operatives around the world would pay anything to get their hands on Saddam Hussein's arsenal and would stop at nothing to use it against us. America must act, and Congress must make clear to Hussein that he faces a united nation."

Yeah Johnny, we learned 'em.

http://web.archive.org/web/20021214041757/edwards.senate.gov/statements/20020912_iraq.html

http://web.archive.org/web/20030219152335/edwards.senate.gov/press/2002/0912a-pr.html

http://www.usembassy.it/file2002_09/alia/a2091910.htm

So this is your progressive candidate?

[Time for change]

82. I feel much the same way

If Kucinich appears viable to me by the time of my primary, I'll vote for him. If not, I'll vote for Edwards.

[peace13]

86. This was a nice post to find.

I had been wondering where all of my Kucinich friends were and they have come out here in support of a great man, one who protects the American people and our Constitution. Go Dennis. One of a kind. Peace,Kim

[FREEWILL56]

88. I will vote for DK unless by the time my state's primary rolls around

that he drops out. It seems that many of the high potential states that could go for DK are not in the forefront of the primary order either. Add to that the MSM keeping those names they dislike in their abyss of contempt and none are to mention the names in public. I did say before that one of the top 3 would be added to that abyss that DK was sent to. Does this sound like the MSM playing God to me? Yes, and they are, when I had found that some fellow Democrats did not even know who DK was, what he stands for, and that there are more presidential candidates running than the MSM would say. Don't give me that 'they didn't have a chance from the getgo' bullshit to have warranted being ignored at the getgo as this MSM bullshit is being supported by many Dems it seems as they wish to eliminate competition at any cost for their own candidates. It has morphed into who's got money, bs, and power and not who has the guts and principles. That's why we get assholes like bush in office adding that the republican party is nearly completely corrupt.
I will continue to hope that even in defeat that maybe he could even be a vp. My vote stands for DK unless DK says go a different way as I trust him more than anyone in the running because his character makes him taller than any of them and that's on record.