Dennis Kucinich's name is largely absent from these last-minute DU dust-ups.

[LoZoccolo]

This despite his large support base here.

I think that that is more evidence that his campaign is a hypothetical one and not serious. I would say that he revealed that himself with the consideration of the Ron Paul vice-candidacy, because he picked someone so ideologically opposed to him (but still popular with a fringe element) that they pretty much wouldn't have been able to work together on many things had he actually been elected.

The question now is (at it has been the one I have been trying to raise all along): given the hypothetical nature of his campaign, is it fair to compare the other candidates to someone who knows that he is not going to win? Is it fair to trash them for not measuring up to someone who is not going to have to deliver?

[comradebillyboy]

1. It looks to me like he has given up

and will now support Obama.

[stimbox]

2. Yes it is.

[sniffa]

3. can't believe it took you till today

but better late than never. :thumbsup:

[flvegan]

4. Nice avatar.

Score one for Oasis.

[Kucinich4America]

5. You must have been gone yesterday?

The Hillbots all busted blood vessels in their heads because Dennis suggested that Iowa caucus voters should go to Obama, if he fails to hit the magic 15% in their precinct.

By the way.... go back to the Fuck Nader avatar. I'm pretty sure that an avatar bashing a Democratic candidate is verboten. ;)

[Yael]

6. He threw it in and moved on to NH

[LWolf]

7. Of course it is.

It is certainly fair to question the values and direction of the party as a whole, if the majority prefer lesser platforms.

It is certainly fair to point out that Democrats have the opportunity to choose a candidate that actually stands for what the party purports to.

It is more than fair to point out that if the majority of Democrats don't have the courage to stand, fight, and vote for the direction of the party, and for the values of the party, they can hardly expect their elected representatives to do so.

It is perfectly fair to remind the majority voters that choosing the lesser of the candidates as a ploy to earn "swing" conservative/moderate votes is a conscious choice to abandon votes from the left that they are not entitled too, and cannot "assume."

It is, finally, absolutely fair to hold the majority of the party accountable for their votes.

[Zorra]

8. What is a serious campaign? A campaign that is well funded by

corporate money, and one which is promoted by MSM hype?

Or is it a campaign by an individual that is genuinely interested in making our country better, and promotes a comprehensive platform designed to solve the critical problems that we as a nation are currently faced with.

It seems like, to all too many Americans, a "serious campaign" is nothing more than a controlled, corporate sponsored popularity contest.

[Desertrose]

9. "a controlled, corporate sponsored popularity contest"

Perfectly stated definition of a "serious campaign" according to DNC & MSM qualifications.

Thank you.