Reply #121: To simplify

[kenfrequed]

And I am simplifying because your arguments are redundant and undescriptive:

Let us divide them into categories:

x ran for president:
You ought to throw this analogy out right away because it is dead weight. Or maybe list weighting, I'm really not sure which at this point.

--------------------------
x is a fringe candidate:
Well actually that could cover four or more of points of your little analogy. If you rate it by issues the majority of Americans actually are closer to Kucinich than any other candidate on the board.


---------
X could not win in a statewide election or national election:
speculatory in the extreme and everything that is wrong with politics. Being a Minnesotan I feel obliged to inform you that many, many people had counted out Paul Wellstone back in his 1990 senatorial bid.

But as an analogy it is unprovable since we cannot truly ascertain if they are similar unless they both somehow get their respective parties endorsement.
---------
x attracts voters fed up with both parties:
Usually the DLC sorts that rag on Kucinich most would applaud at anyone that could appeal to independents or self described moderates. Apparantly this is only the case if THEY get to define the word moderate and exlude issues from the discussion.

I suppose I could give you this one, since Kucinich is such a step back towards pre-reagan progressive-pro labor democrats that he might attract people that do not believe they have a party anymore. And Ron Paul sounds crazy and people like crazy...

--------------

Belief in conspiracy theories:

I will grant you that Ron Paul definitely gets really wild about his theories. As to Kucinich, well there must be Some people that have been quietly working for the former VP these last six months or so. I presume they are nominally associated with the federal government so maybe Kucinich has a point.

Also unless you were sleeping during the run-up to Iraq, Kucinich was right about nearly everything. It was everyone else that ended up being suckers. Is a conspiracy theory still a conspiracy theory if it is true?