when are they going to try to exclude Kucinich from debates?

[eablair3]

is there a chance of that happening?

I've watched a couple, and Kucinich cuts right to the heart of the issues. He confronts the others about their indefensible or embarrassing positions that they would rather not talk about. I've seen him confront Dean, Gephardt and others. They've all looked very uncomfortable when put on the spot by Kucinich.

If one or two candidates start getting more and more attention, will they just move to exclude Dennis K from debates? Is that coming sometime in the future?

[goobergunch]

1. I doubt it...

the 9 candidates are established as "the official candidates" enougth that I don't think exclusion would be possible.

[IndianaGreen]

2. "They" (whoever they are) better not keep Dennis off the debates!

You will see open warfare with many liberal supporters of other antiwar candidates throwing their support to Kucinich out of general principle.

[ibegurpard]

7. I agree

Would be pretty stupid.

[eablair3]

10. "They" are

the people who organize and invite candidates to debates, as well as those with enough power to tell those that organize and invite candidates who to invite and who not to.

typically, those with that much power are the establishment dems (DLC) and especially those Dem candidates that perhaps start to take a lead and distance themselves from most of the rest. these candidates don't want to have to be put on the spot by someone like Kucinich, so they'll try to make sure he is not invited. the usual reason is that "his poll numbers are so low and we only wanted to invite those candidates with higher poll numbers."

The mass media is already starting to put Kucinich in that category, along with Sharpton and Mosely-Braun. They call them "marginal candidates."

That leaves you with Dean, Gephardt, Lieberman and maybe Kerry?? Those candidates would all likely want to see Dennis K excluded. And, how many anti-war candidates are in that group? The only one I know of is Dean who was originally against the war in Iraq, but he is not anti-war right now. He is pro-occupation last I read. His positions keep changing as his poll numbers go up. Wonder where he'll end up on the issues?

[cherryperry]

3. They might try after New Hampshire and

base it on too many candidates so we have to drop those who got less than X (whatever percentage Kucinich got).

New Hampshirites for Kucinich: GET OUT THE VOTE!

On the other hand, what the hell do I know?

[Abe Linkman]

4. Soon come

Why ask when? The important point is that DK is perceived not to be a team player on the "talk progress, but comfort the rich" team.

[Karmadillo]

5. Here's a link re: winnowing debates to the mainstream six

Not likely to happen, but if Kucinich, Mosley-Braun, and Sharpton use the debates to their advantage, who knows?

http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/6109329.htm

ST. PAUL, Minn. - Democrats are starting to wrestle with a thorny problem: how to brush aside three fringe candidates for president who have no realistic chance of winning their party's nomination next year.

Several state Democratic Party chairmen think the national party should find a way to limit debates to the top six candidates and exclude the three widely considered to make up the bottom tier: Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio, former Sen. Carol Moseley Braun of Illinois and the Rev. Al Sharpton of New York.

In interviews before this week's annual meeting of the Association of State Democratic Chairs, several suggested setting a threshold for candidates' admission to debates based on support as measured in public-opinion polls, fund raising or campaign organization in early primary states. They favored doing this even before the first votes are cast next January.

Other state chairmen disagreed, saying they preferred to keep the debates and the race wide open until Democratic voters start winnowing the field themselves with caucus and primary votes early next year. Any effort to bar candidates would be undemocratic, they said, and would risk alienating rank-and-file party members. Notably, two of the bottom three candidates are African-Americans, one of the party's most loyal constituencies. All three are liberals.

more...

[eablair3]

13. thanks for the link

I missed that one, but that is the type of thing you see mainstream media setting the stage to happen.

I agree. K will have to make good showings (even "surprising" showings) in the early rounds in Iowa and New Hampshire to even stay in the debates. And, who knows what will happen to him when it moves to the south. South Carolina for K?

[birdman]

31. They will never restrict the debates

because Sharpton will play the race card and claim that
he is being excluded by a racist party. The nomination
will be settled by March 2 so there won't be debates
after that.

[realFedUp]

6. K fan or just a troll?

so hard to tell anymore...

[eablair3]

12. K fan

I'm a K fan. And, I'm sick and tired of seeing the mass media try to marginalize him.

This thought just came to mind, and I was wondering about what the other dems are going to do about Dennis K. He's the only one telling the truth.

[JohnKleeb]

30. I am sick of it too blair

He's so right on things and seeing people bash him in this thread really pisses me off. I am also glad to see people who support other candiates like liberty chick defend him.

[JohnKleeb]

8. They better not

He does a great job.

[demnan]

9. I surely hope not

the worst mistake Gore made was going along with Bush to exclude Nader from the debates. Nader would have expressed a liberal view point while freely destroying the credibility of Bush. That's not to say I supported Nader, I didn't. But I did feel that he had a right to be in the debate.

Kucinich has a right to be there. He's running a campaign and working hard, they all deserve to be there.

[Prodemsouth]

27. I disagree.

If you look at what Nader was saying in the press at the time, he was after Gore. He would have challanged Gore's statements. He and Gore were looking for voters in the same category, it would have made sense from a debate/camp. standpoint to attack Gore. Bush would have seemed above the fray.

[HalfManHalfBiscuit]

11. They'll just "conveniently" forget to supply his high chair

Then little K will be below the screen. Bastards.

[diamondsoul]

17. If that's sarcasm, you'd be wise to show it,

and if not, *ROTFL*

When you run out of methods of attacking Kucinich go for his physical appearance. Pathetic.

[Desertrose]

21. Its one of the things he does best, diamondsoul

1/2man1/2biscuit always has to get in his wisecracks...

Like height is true the measure of a man anyway.

(Out of curiousity...maybe since he's only half of each, maybe he is a bit challenged in the height department ??)

:shrug:


Peace
DR

[Tinoire]

28. Half Man, Half Biscuit, and Half what else?

Luckily the choices are endless...

[poskonig]

14. No, and it is bad strategy.

Kucinich is polling at 0-1% in the polls. Banning him would only give him strength.

[DealsGapRider]

15. By all means, keep him in the debates.

When he starts dishing his silly far-left views, tilting after windmills and alienating swing voters, he'll make the rest of the field of candidates look reasonable, moderate and wise. In fact, I think he should follow Dean around everywhere he goes so the good doctor can point to Kucinich and say, "I know they call me a far-left radical, but THIS is the guy they were thinking of...I'm moderate AND electable!"

I know the DK people will flame me here in a minute, but I couldn't resist.

[diamondsoul]

16. Nice. Maybe you should be posting on a few of NJ's threads.

I've earned more respect than that from Dean supporters because I won't sink to your level.

[DemBones DemBones]

18. I won't flame you but I think you micharacterize Kucinich and

underestimate the American people's ability to separate truth from bullshit -- and preference for truth.

Universal health care is not a "silly far-left view." Doing away with the Patriot Act is not a "silly far-left view." Ending the US's participation in NAFTA and the WTO is not a "silly far-left view." Breaking up agribusiness monopolies and restoring family farms is not a "silly far-left view." Etcetera. ;-)

[poskonig]

19. I think he means Kucinich has a crazy delivery.

Kucinich often sounds like an uncompromising fanatic to many though I do agree with him on 80% of the issues.

[XanaDUer]

25. What Dembones Dembones said

Well put, DBDB.

LC

[Desertrose]

20. I won't flame you but I don't appreciate your insults

and condescending manner....
.........silly far-left views? .......tilting at windmills??alienating swing voters??

Like your attitude doesn't alienate people...

you have just given me yet one more reason to question this whole Dean worship crowd....

...and like Dennis needs to follow Dean around? Hell, Dennis has been speaking out on issues because he cares- not because he is running for office...

You have a great open minded attitude there, friend....yeah, real sweet...sure makes me consider what a swell guy Dean is when he attracts so many snarky supporters....

Peace
DR

[DealsGapRider]

23. Check out HR 2977, introduced by Kucinich in 2001.

This bill would outlaw weapons using "radiation, electromagnetic, psychotronic, sonic, laser, or other energies directed at individual persons or targeted populations for the purpose of information war, mood management, or mind control of such persons or populations."

The man introduces a bill in Congress outlawing imaginary mind-control devices and he's NOT a foaming at the mouth radical?? Please. The guy is a space cadet.

Shit, if aliens landed during a Kucinich presidency, they wouldn't say "Take me to your leader," they'd say, "But you've already met our emmissary Dennis."

[birdman]

26. Kucinich is quite harmless

Yeah, the mind-control weapons in space are laughable
and the Department of Peace would supply plenty of material
for Leno and Letterman but DK is not a real candidate.

His supporters will get behind the real nominee in the end.

[diamondsoul]

36. He's a Democrat, He's declared, he's in every debate,

and he has put out a comprehensive platform (more comprehensive than any of the others) with clearly expressed plans of implementation.

He's as "real" as any of the others, in fact more so.

[Desertrose]

29. Uh...are you so sure these things do not exist?

This bill has been pointed out before...and I have yet to see anyone tell me that these things are not possible or already in existence ....

Radiation...not real?
Electromagnetic pulses...EMP....not real?
Sonic...untrasound....not real??
Laser....don't want a red dot on my forehead thank you....
....and you don't think we are being mind controlled by the media at this point?? why not space??

But there really is PNAC, there really are bio & chem weapons and you are now telling me there is no possiblity that with all the $$$ ( a trillion??) unaccounted for in the penatagon, that none of this unexplained money could have gone to weapons that gee, maybe they don't tell us about??

I really love to meet people who have absolutely convinced themselves they absolutely know everything. How wonderful for you...sure hope nothing ever comes along to make you question your views....

Peace
DR

[birdman]

32. Uh, yeah, sure

[DealsGapRider]

33. Whatever

Nominate Kucinich and then watch both the media and the GOP trot this bill out -- and the hundreds of other silly things Kucinich has said and done for the last 30 years -- and you can spend your time explaining to the American electorate that mind control weapons might really exist after all (while not being able to focus on far more real and immediate threats to our people like $500 bill annual deficits)! Yeah, they'll listen to you with a straight face. They'll take your ideas seriously. Uh huh.

[diamondsoul]

34. Uh, bad news for you-

there are Government documents supporting research into means to control moods, thoughts, behaviors etc. with remote technology. It's been going on for decades and most of us are well aware of it.

What's most telling is how all the opponents who bring this up focus on the ONE item in that entire, quite comprehensive bill, that could be portrayed as "foaming at the mout radical". It's called using an ounce of prevention. In any case that particular item was removed from the bill and it was re-introduced. Knowing that, the fact that he was accepting to removing that segment of it, I'd have to say no, he isn't a "fomaing at the mouth radical", just a concerned citizen who asked for everything he wanted.

[loyalsister]

41. And if this research has panned out

why do I know several people with serious mental illnesses? If moods and thoughts can be controlled from afar, surely it can be done for the benefit of a person who has a mood or thought disorder, I would think.

[diamondsoul]

44. Again, that's not the point.

The point is the Government itself has been conducting these studies for decades. With the advent of space technology, WHEN they find what they are looking for, there is every possibility some loon in power will decide to use it against the people. See the Government doesn't conduct studies like that to help it's own people. It conducts them for use in war.

Regardless of what I think about that paltry few lines, the entire bill is no more out there or crazy than any environmental protection bill. Have YOU read the whole thing, or did you just zero in on the two or three whole lines that struck you as kooky? I've taken the time to read the whole thing. It's a sensible bill, unless you're content with the notion that there's a weapon system floating around over your head that could just as easily be used on you as anyone else.

The Star Wars project, floating around in limbo right now, soaking up funds that could be used to send WATER to our troops in Iraq. A program proven to be worthless because by the time we discover a missile has been launched and track the trajectory, use of a "Star Wars" defense will be ineffective. Not only that but if it's a low-flying missile, it endangers millions of innocent people. You want it deployed? I don't. Kucinich's bill would have prevented that, and essentially freed up any funding set aside for that for use where it's needed.

Something tells me you're one of those people who would have called Edison and Bell nuts too.

[birdman]

22. They won't kick Kucinich out

With his 1% or less standing in the polls
he'll have no choice but to withdraw shortly
after New Hampshire or try to hitchhike to South
Carolina. Maybe in a better world Kucinich could
actually be a real candidate but realistically
he's got no chance whatsoever to get anywhere near
the nomination.

[Desertrose]

24. They say if you repeat somthing often enough it becomes truth..

however I still don't believe the crap about bushie....

I do believe DK has a chance...he is currently #2 in the meetup sign up...

and polls...aren't they also those same things taht tell us how much people love bushie??



My theory...ya never know?!
:)
Peace
DR

[diamondsoul]

37. Ladies and Gents, I give you-

the most oft repeated pre-election refrain to every single political office Dennis J. Kucinich has ever held.

"Maybe in a better world Kucinich could
actually be a real candidate but realistically
he's got no chance whatsoever to get anywhere near
the nomination."

Funny how so many times that statement has proven false, innit?

[birdman]

38. Less than 1%

I don't think you're going to see any miracles.

[diamondsoul]

48. And I'll remind you what the REST of the polls say-

Kucinich is not polling at less than 1%, he's polling anywhere from 0-3% depending on the poll itself. Meanwhile the current frontrunner is polling at an average of 14% with the number of undecideds and "other" voters ranging anywhere from 30-60+%.

That's a hell of a lot of unclaimed votes, and getting even a majority of them would put any of the low polling Dems in the front-runner category. With almost 6 mos to go before the first primary the race has just started.

[CMT]

35. as long as he is a candidate he will be in the debates

I don't think you have to fret about it.

[tlcandie]

39. Hold your treasures close to your heart less swine turn and rend you!

Kucinich is a pearl! I don't worry about the slammers who appear in these threads...they are just upset that it isn't them out there instead of the 'wimps' like Kucinich, so they come here and spew their inferiority and madness!

Just ignore em! They will crawl back into their holes soon enough :) Btw, check out all the changes happening around the world with things such as Green Plans, Direct Democracy, etc.! There's a tidal wave of transformation coming and I hope we catch it :hi:

KucinichTsunami2win!!

[Terwilliger]

40. why eablair3...whatever makes you think that would happen???

:shrug:

A truly horrible thing to suggest about "Democrats"

Right?

[Northwind]

42. Not going to happen

But not for the reasons you might think.

Kucinich provides a valuable service to the other candidates with his "frothing madman" act at the forums and other multi-candidate events. His behaving like a shrill lunatic allows the other candidates to propose reform and change without coming off as radical. He makes the other candidates more appealing to generations of Americans who have been conditioned to think that liberalism is anathema to the American way of life.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

47. "Frothing madman"?

I've seen Kucinich in person. I take it you haven't.

He has a superb rapport with the audience. In fact, if he hadn't gone into politics, he would have made a great talk show host.

[diamondsoul]

49. Surprise!

Dennis at one point hosted his own radio talk show.

Pay no mind to Northwind. It's NW's goal in life to depress Kucinich supporters, I think. Standard post from NW is what you see here on the subject of Kucinich, and it's what we can expect from the most cynical of people.

[loyalsister]

43. I doubt they will

He has a lot of good things to say. I think his platform is a pipedream and some of his ideas are a little irresponsible, but he has something to add.

[Keithpotkin]

45. how many of u supported nader being kept out of the debates?

just wondering.

[GabysPoppy]

46. He will be dropped when

He and he alone decides he is no longer a candidate.

Other than that one scenario, any attempt to exclude him or any other announced candidate makes us no better than the repugs. In fact it makes us worse, because we should know better. They (repugs) have a patent on ignorance, arrogance and stupidity which we should not encroach on.

EOM