I will never forgive Dennis Kucinich (he did to Edwards what Nader did to Gore)

[LBJDemocrat]

Kucinich, by telling his supporters to caucus for Obama if he himself was unviable, likely cost Edwards the Iowa caucus and possibly even the nomination and presidency. This was a terrible betrayal of not just Edwards, but also of the American worker. Even if Edwards was never destined to be the nominee, a stronger showing could have forced the other candidates to adopt a more economically progressive and anti-globalist/freetrade agenda. As things stand, it seems that the primaries will simply be a popularity contest based on image.

Don't get me wrong, I have a tremendous amount of respect for Obama; but I hoped that a stronger Edwards showing might push him to adopt a tougher stance against economic injustices perpetrated against the working men and women of our republic. I hoped that the Democratic platform this year might be more progressive than 2004's, but it looks like it might be less so.

Kucinich, out of his own vanity and probably bitterness over Edwards' stealing much of his platform, chose to prevent this from happening. By doing so, he may have helped cause unimaginable economic nightmares for millions of decent Americans. I can't recall the last time I've been as disgusted with a Democrat.

[Superman Returns]

1. Obama was against the war

Edwards supported it and co sponsored it. Nuff said.

[indimuse]

24. ...

show me where Obama made a public statement or wrote a letter to the President anything objecting / opposing the war..when did he Stand Up and make that CHANGE? He DID make a public statement "I don't know how I would have voted." ANYONE can be against the war...after the fact! He has voted for EVERY funding bill "FOR THE WAR" since arriving to DC!!! THAT"S VOTING FOR THE WAR!!!!!!!!!!!!

[athena]

57. Here you go: an anti-Iraq-war speech from 2002:

The text of the speech:
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Barack_Obama's_Iraq_Speech

and some video excerpts of the speech and some interviews he gave at the time, and later:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhpKmQCCwB8

[pennylane100]

2. I did not support Kuchinich and I have always been suspicious of him

because of his change of stance regarding a women's right to choose, but it's a dog eat dog world. Maybe he thought he could get more of his platform passed through deal making. Wow, can't believe I was just sticking up for him.

[maxanne]

6. ha

but you aren't suspicious of Edwards for changing his mind about damn near every vote he ever cast?

[pennylane100]

9. Well yes, that does worry me,

but I want to believe that he has seen the light.

[pennylane100]

17. I had no idea, This is very distrubing

about Al Gore. Do you know when he changed his opinion.

[maxanne]

27. why

are you more willing to give Edwards the benefit of the doubt than Kucinich?

Kucinich did see the light about choice.

He also voted against the war, the Patriot Act, voted against the Yucca Mountain nukewaste dump, and supports marriage equality.

Edwards voted for the war, voted for Yucca Mountain, voted for the Patriot Act, and has said that gay people make him uncomfortable.

Can you help me to understand why you're holding DK to one standard, and Edwards to another?

[pennylane100]

60. I did not realize that I was,

but, on the other hand, Edwards is the best looking.

[no name no slogan]

12. You do know that up until 1988, Al Gore was "pro-life", right?

As was Hubert H. Humphrey. As is Joe Biden.

[Samantha]

28. Not quite true

Until 1988, Al Gore always voted against abortion because he represented an extremely conservative state that was against it. He has openly discussed the fact that he thought he was obligated to vote the way the people of Tennessee preferred, as opposed to his own feelings on the subject. He said he always privately thought decisions on these matters properly belonged primarily to the woman, who hopefully would consult with the father and her personal physician prior to making the final decision. He had some sort of epiphany at a point in his political career when he simply decided to vote his conscience. And, no, it had nothing to do with his future presidential run.

[no name no slogan]

40. He voted pro-life, even if he didn't believe it. Like Hillary and Edwards voted

for the IWR, even if they didn't "want" to go to war.

Politics is politics.

[ZombieHorde]

3. never forgive

Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

[flvegan]

4. There should be a "Bullshit" nomination next to the "Recommend"

Vanity and bitterness over "stealing much of his platform"? Oh, please.

Disgusted...like when Edwards co-sponsored the IWR?

It was a shot at Hillary, Kucinich's move. Get over it.

[IA_Seth]

13. Lol, I second the motion to have a "bullshit" link! n/t

[Pastiche423]

30. I third it!

[Turn CO Blue]

56. More likely Kucinich struck some "deal" with Obama

for a post he wants - remember DK wants to start a Department of Peace. At least, I have a sneaking suspicion somethign like that went down in the conversation between them. Kucinich is not without a little conceit and self-interest just like the other professional politicians and just like us all.

[LeftyMom]

5. 1. He doesn't owe his supporters' votes to anybody.

2. I'm pretty sure the idea there was to defeat a certain war monger in a bad pantsuit, and to throw support behind whoever was best able to do that.

[no name no slogan]

7. You should be pissed at Edwards for not supporting Kucinich

Kucinich's platform AND record is a hell of a lot more progressive than Edwards'. Why back the Johnny-come-lately progressive when you can back the one who not only lost his job because of his progressive beliefs, but had a mafia contract placed on him?

:popcorn:

[DemBones DemBones]

20. BINGO!!! Why don't people vote for the man whose positions have been stolen

instead of for the thieves?

[flvegan]

31. Hot diggity damn but you nailed it.

Nice work.

[Desertrose]

59. Exactly...

You nailed it.

[maximusveritas]

8. Nonsense

Obama beat Edwards by 8 points and even more in the entrance poll.
Unless you think Kucinich was worth double digit support, your assertion is wrong.

[speedoo]

10. So you are saying Obama would be as bad as Bush. Or worse.

Nader gave us Bush, as you may recall.

Most idiotic post I've read in months. I second flvegan's "bullshit" nomination.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

11. I never wanted Kucinich for anything. I don't know why but I just didn't. nt

[EffieBlack]

14. You don't differentiate between Democrat Kucinich throwing his support behind another Democrat

one of several Democrats in a Democratic primary that will result in a Democrat being nominated for president and Ralph Nader deliberately taking votes away from the only Democrat running in a general election and helping to deliver the election to the Republican nominee?

Hmmm.

[IA_Seth]

15. Edwards owes 04 to the exact same tactic!

How silly of a post. Edwards only finished 2nd in Iowa in 2004 because Kucinich asked his supporters to back him... did you bitch then? If it weren't for Kucinich in 04, Edwards wouldn't still be running.

[DemBones DemBones]

16. You do know that in 2004 Kucinich told his supporters to go with Edwards

on the second ballot in Iowa, enraging the Dean supporters?

I don't know why he preferred Obama to Edwards this year but he may have good reasons.

[LBJDemocrat]

34. Yes

That's why I consider it a betrayal. I thought Edwards and Kucinich got along. I'd like to know whether his backing of Obama was a principled, political, or personal act.

[Radical Activist]

18. Obama has a stronger progressive record than Edwards.

I think Kucinich looks at more than words in a stump speech, like many voters do.

If you want someone who speaks for working people then think about the guy who got his start in political left wing movement activism by knocking on doors in housing projects on the south side of Chicago.

[bullwinkle428]

19. NO - the numbers weren't there!!! Trust me on this one,

he did not have enough supporters to tilt the numbers for or against anyone. I was at a caucus with 555 attendees!! In my own precinct, most of the DK supporters joined with most of the other Biden/Dodd/Richardson supporters and aligned with Edwards anyway...

Look, I'm an Edwards supporter, but your argument simply does not hold water.

BTW...Nader didn't fuck Gore over; the Supreme Court did!

[kelligesq]

35. Didnt really make a big difference as far as electoral votes go, cause

Obama ended up with 5 electoral votes
Edwards got 4 electoral votes
Hillary got 4 electroal votes

so what's the big deal...one electoral vote difference and they're acting like
Obama won the presidency. I doubt he will. I think it's unlikely America in its entirety will elect a black president yet.

And by the way, I dont like Michelle Obama one bit...a nasty piece of work - they've stopped her from attacking other dem candidates - and sometimes she has a real nasty expression on her face...but then I wouldnt vote for Obama either or for Hillary.

Edwards is the answer to this country's problems.

[bullwinkle428]

50. Don't know enough about Michelle Obama to have really

formed an opinion of her myself, but on the subject of spouses, you'd have to look far and wide to find someone saying a bad word about Elizabeth Edwards! Don't think she wouldn't have a major influence on John's decision making, either...

[Egnever]

21. LOL last time he did it for Edwards

How quickly they turn

[TeamJordan23]

22. How the heck did it cost Edwards the caucus? You think his 8% loss was b/c of Kucinich?

You must be crazy. If only Dennis had that much influence.

[Honeycombe8]

I can understand how you feel. But Obama was the only other candidate who'd been against the IW ..

from the start, so it makes sense, in that sense. The Iraq War is a huge issue, particularly to Kucinich.

I watched one of the precincts caucus on CSPAN, from start to finish, so I heard conversations of the Kucinich, Richardson, and Biden people realigning with other groups. I didn't hear anyone say they were going to Obama because D.K. said to do that.

None of the Biden people changed to "undecided," as Biden had asked his people to do.

The requests of the unviable candidates were probably somewhat influential, but I think the people probably went to their 2nd choice candidates, no matter what anyone else said.

[DesertRat]

23. You have it wrong

Kucinich isn't vain and bitter over "Edward's stealing much of his platform". It is clear why he wouldn't suggest that his supporters caucus for Edwards or Clinton. It's all about their support of the war.

11-21-07
By Dennis Kucinich

Revelations in today’s New York Times regarding John Edwards’ staunch pro-war stance as a Vice Presidential candidate in 2004 “raise serious questions about the credibility of his positions on every issue being debated in this Presidential campaign,” Ohio Congressman and Democratic Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich said today.

“Voters have every right to ask, ‘Were you telling the truth then, John, or are you telling the truth now?’ And Senator Edwards has a responsibility to answer,” Kucinich said.

In a major story today about the relationship between Edwards and Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry during the 2004 campaign, the Times reported, “Mr. Kerry had increasing doubts about the war. But Mr. Edwards argued that they should not renounce their votes — they had to show conviction and consistency.” Edwards was a co-sponsor of the 2002 war authorization resolution, along with Sen. Joseph Lieberman.

“Mr. Kerry yielded to his running mate,” according to the Times story, and told reporters early in the 2004 campaign that he would still have voted for the 2002 war authorization even knowing that Iraq did not possess weapons of mass destruction. Six weeks later, in a speech at New York University, he reversed himself, over the objections of Edwards, the Times reported.A year later, in an opinion piece published in The Washington Post, Edwards reversed his own position, a move that some Kerry aides described as “politically expedient” in the planned run-up to the 2008 Presidential campaign.

“John Kerry was hammered by the Republicans and by many in the media for changing his positions on the war and other issues in the 2004 campaign,” Kucinich noted. “The fact of the matter is that he wanted to come out against the war in 2004, and John Edwards argued against it.”

“Now,” Kucinich continued, “we have a candidate who voted for the war and voted to fund the war, but says he against it. He voted for the Patriot Act, and now he complains about its abuses. He voted for China Trade in 2000 knowing that Americans would be hurt, and now he’s decrying the unsafe products pouring into this nation from China. He supported nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain, now he’s against it.”“Will the real John Edwards please stand up?” Kucinich said.

http://www.dennis4president.com/go/newsroom/edwards%92-pro%11war-posture-in-%9204-raises-serious-credibility-questions/

[Honeycombe8]

25. This is what I thought it might be. Except I didn't know all that background info. nt

[Adelante]

41. China trade, too, and other stuff

WASHINGTON, D.C. – “Made in China” has become a health and safety warning label for American consumers following the recalls of tens of millions of Chinese-made toys, but the “real warning label should say ‘Made in Washington, D.C. by corporate lobbyists’ because the life-threatening hazards of these products were either ignored or brushed off by members of the Congress seven yeas ago,” Democratic Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich said today.

And, at least one then-member of the Senate, John Edwards, who has been railing lately in favor of higher safety standards for Chinese-made products, defended his 2000 vote supporting expanded China trade with the famously reported comment, “it does us no good to pretend that these remedies are perfect and that people will not be hurt.”

“Senator Edwards knew seven years ago that people would be hurt, so why did he vote for China trade?” Kucinich asked. “How credible is his newfound consumer protectionism and his campaign advocacy for trade reform to save American jobs?”

Kucinich, D-OH, noted that Edwards, who became a millionaire as a trial lawyer with considerable expertise in product liability matters, “knew better than any other member of the Senate what the risks were in sending U.S. manufacturing jobs to a country with almost no labor standards, no health and safety standards, and no environmental standards.”Beyond that, Kucinich pointed out, Edwards’vote in favor of the 2000 China trade agreement has resulted in the loss of more than 973,00 manufacturing jobs and more than 1.2 million jobs total, according to studies released by the AFL-CIO.

“If he knew then that this trade agreement would hurt people and put Americans out of work, he had a moral responsibility to vote against it,” said Kucinich, who has a perfect record in his votes against unfair trade agreements. “Like his now-regretted vote in favor of the resolution that led to the Iraq war, his votes on trade issues raise questions of judgment.” “When candidates stand in front of a union audience or in front of the cameras, they bemoan the three millions jobs that have been lost because of ‘free trade’ agreements,” Kucinich noted. “When they had a chance to vote as a member of Congress, they strongly supported those agreements. That means they voted against American workers, and, as recent events have shown, against American consumers.”

http://www.dennis4president.com/go/newsroom/%91made-in-china%92-hazards-began-with-%91made-in-washington,-d.c.%92/


There are a number of things. He was upset at the 527 funding and Mellon money, with the fact that Edwards has money personally invested in companies that will profit from his health care plan such as Humana, and Dennis says that's why Edwards won't go for a not for profit plan - a number of issues Dennis is pissed off with Edwards about. I think Dennis did believe in Edwards in 2004 - not that they were on the same page, but that Edwards was sincere, a moderate, but sincere. He just doesn't think so about the revised Edwards. Also, let's face it, Dennis's traditional support hasn't been as reliable this time around and I can't imagine Dennis could be happy so many have gone to Edwards. He's human and there must be some pain about this. But I think the bottom line is he's decided Edwards is a hypocrite.

[samdogmom]

26. Good Grief!

Nader was a third party candidate in a general election (and he made a huge difference in Florida which ended up being a major problem for Gore. The exercise on Jan. 3 was a primary (and a caucus primary at that!) There is no comparison!

I have avoided DU for months because I can't stand the in-fighting going on right now! Aren't we all on the same side when it comes right down to it? I don't think I'll spend a lot of time on DU until the primaries are over (I simply can't believe how crazy it has gotten here! This used to be a very reasonable and tolerant board, but now I'm not so sure!)

That being said--come on--ANY DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE IS A FAR,FAR BETTER CHOICE THAN ANY REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE! (I do have my favorite (Edwards and then Obama), but I WILL support the party candidate come November!)

[kelligesq]

29. How can you say

Edwards stole Kucinich's platform? Edwards has been campaigning with this platform since 2004...so who copied who?

[kelligesq]

33. But I dont understand why Kucinich gave his caucus to Obama as did

Dodd and Biden. Looks like Edwards is the outsider. Dont forget Obama is still a Washington insider. I'd like to know their reasoning unless Edwards is taking away their money pot by being against lobbyists....that could be it.

[stillcool]

38. Obama is a Washington insider?

and Edwards is an outsider? Am I supposed to forget the past? They are all backed by some very heavy hitters or they wouldn't be where they are. I don't see much difference between Edwards and Obama...but then I don't dislike either of them. Crazy, eh?

[Honeycombe8]

42. Dodd & Biden did not instruct their groups to go to Obama. Only DK did.

And you know why. There are lots of posts in the forum explaining it, and DK has plainly stated it on his website, according to a post above.

In any case, I watched a precinct caucus on CSPAN last night from start to finish. Biden had instructed his people to change to "undecided," if he was unviable. None of the folks at the precinct I watched did that. And I heard no one in the DK group discuss what DK wanted them to do. The youngest ones I saw went to Obama - no surprise there. I don't know where the others went.

It didn't look to me like they paid much attention to what the candidates had requested, anyway. Would you vote for someone you didn't like, just because someone else told you to?

[Pastiche423]

37. Did you type that w/a straight face?

What baloney.

johnnyboy did not have the same platform this go around as he did in '04 - no where close.

To answer your question, "so who copied who?", the answer is johnnyboy copied Dennis Kucinich's.

[Adelante]

43. WHAAT??

Edwards was a centrist in 2004. He decided to be a progressive to run again for president. Kucinich has been a progressive forever. There is no way you can say Kucinich has copied ANYTHING from Edwards.

[Adelante]

32. Kucinich does not BELIEVE in Edwards

He said it on Tucker this week. Asked why not Clinton or Edwards over Obama? Dennis said it was because he believes Obama is "sincere" - direct quote. The interview was on Monday, I believe.

[LBJDemocrat]

49. Didn't stop him from supporting Edwards in 2004

Against Dean, of all people. Why the change of heart?

[Adelante]

51. Edwards has changed

I think Kucinich doesn't believe it's for real.

[dansolo]

54. I believe his support in '04 was because of his ego

Dennis was upset that Howard Dean was viewed as the viable anti-war candidate. It must have hurt his ego to see someone else get the recognition that he felt he deserved. His support of Edwards back in '04 was clearly meant to hurt Dean. How else can you reconcile his supporting of the co-sponsor of the IWR?

[TeamJordan23]

36. Can anyone please tell me how Kucinich cost Edwards the caucus?

How much support did Dennis really have in Iowa?

[no name no slogan]

39. IIRC, all three of Kucinich's people

ended up caucusing for Obama. Clearly enough to win it for him :crazy:

[melody]

44. I agree, I thought it was a cheap tactic, but it didn't matter in the end anyway n/t

[midnight]

45. I'm not sure that I agree that Edwards stole Kuchinich's platform.

But I do agree with your take on bitterness toward Edwards. I know Dennis has just sustained the lose of a family member and perhaps was distracted with other pain, and lashed out at the wrong man.

[huskerlaw]

46. That's completely untrue

Kucinich had almost zero support in Iowa. In order to be viable, he needed 15% of the vote in any given precinct. What he told his supporters was that if he didn't get the 15% in their specific precinct, they should change their vote to Obama.

While I don't agree with that choice, it make very little, if any difference. Why? Because not only did Kucinich fail to get that 15% in ANY of the 1781 precincts, he was not, and never was, even close. He didn't campaign in Iowa. I worked for the Edwards campaign in Council Bluffs, Iowa the week before Christmas. I spoke to literally hundreds of Democrats and Kucinich's name NEVER EVEN CAME UP!

Many of them had NEVER EVEN HEARD OF HIM.

So. Did Kucinich throw the race for Obama? Hells no. He may have convinced a few hundred people, but even assuming that every single one of his supporters ended up voting for Obama, Kucinich did not have the support of 8% of Iowans.

I say this as an obvious Edwards fan. You're completely wrong.

[Kucinich4America]

47. I'll never forgive LBJ for what he did to Jack Kennedy

Not saying he originated the plot, or even orchestrated the main event.... but there's a reason it went down in Dallas.

[dweller]

48. and you, yourself

should be sorry that you didn't support the right man, with the right ideas, at the right time.

DK has always walked the talk even without support from the loudest of the DU contingent. Sure, the MSM's choices are given the airtime, but where were you? This is not the first time Kucinich's platform has been 'adopted' when necessary by the front runners. Again. Where were you?

locked out? Shut off? Ridiculed? Called 'childish, woo-woo, unelectable'? Feeling stifled much?


Dennis threw his support/supporters behind a voice that would shake up Iowans. Maybe Amerika. Are you listening?

Or are you lockstep with the MSM in the eventual coronation of HillObamDward??

sooner or later, you're going to have to think. For yourself.


peace, fwiw.
dp

[last_texas_dem]

52. I doubt that Kucinich's support in IA was large enough

to make that substantial of a difference. IIRC, he was generally polling between 1 and 2-percent of the state's voters. Obama beat Edwards 38- to 30-percent, so it's doubtful that the Kucinich voters made all that much of a difference.

I was disappointed that Kucinich made the move of telling his supporters to get behind another candidate at all. Yes, I know that he did the same thing in 2004, and likely helped Edwards to an extent. But I just don't like the idea of a candidate instructing his or her supporters to get behind another candidate in a certain event. It just seems presumptuous, and I believe candidates would be better off staying away from that particular tactic, even if they have certain candidates that they personally prefer over others. Additionally, it just gives off a "giving up" vibe to me, rightly or wrongly. I voted for Kucinich in '04, and was planning to vote for him again this year (even though I support Edwards out of the top three candidates) in Texas's (most likely worthless) March 4th primary. But for whatever reason, I'm just getting a vibe from him like his heart isn't really in it this time around.

[Occam Bandage]

53. Cost Edwards the nomination? Dude, Kooch had less than 1% of the vote going in.

[pointsoflight]

55. Probably not, actually.

I'm annoyed that Kucinich did this, too. But the reality is that Kucinich didn't have enough votes to have a big impact (polling at 1-2%). On top of that, Obama only went from 35% (entry poll) to 38% (final tally) when the second choices were figured in. Edwards saw a much bigger gain. So the reality is that despite what Kucinich did, Edwards gained the most from the second-choice reallocation, not Obama. Obama's supporters were there for him going in--he brought out the new voters and young voters just as promised.

Oh, and I say all of this as a strong Edwards supporter. That's just the reality, unfortunately, as much as I hoped Edwards would pull it off.

No worries, lets just hope that Obama and Edwards relegate Hillary to 3rd again.

[Desertrose]

58. Make up your minds- one minute he has NO supporters and the next...

he has enough to give Obama the win??

...and I seriously doubt all his people gave them to Obama just because he suggested it.
DK supporters are pretty independent thinkers I'll have you know.


Besides, the Iowa win will most likely be forgotten by tomorrow evening anyhow....

[fujiyama]

61. LOL

Kucinich cost Edwards' the election?

You give Kucinich way too much credit.

[MalloyLiberal]

62. Thom Hartmann's interview with Kucinich...

Thom Hartmann's interview with Kucinich made me lose any respect I had for Kucinich. He was openly hostile to Hartmann. I hate to say it, he's a "sore loser" that couldn't crack but 1% in Iowa. Another radio show also interviewed Kucinich the other day and asked him why he was not supporting Edwards over Obama, and it sounded like sour grapes. Kucinich has long been attacking Obama in debates for "funding the war" and for other policies (like trade). Kucinich just wanted to be a spoiler, as does Richardson, I think, and that's a shame.