Thoughts on Dennis Kucinich?

[Rage]

I had not really even heard about this guy till about a month ago. He is a member of the U.S. House of Representatives currently and is running for president in 2008.

His plans (from wikipedia) as president are:
* Creating a single-payer system of universal health care that provides full coverage for all Americans by passage of the United States National Health Insurance Act.
* The immediate, phased withdrawal of all U.S. forces from Iraq; replacing them with an international security force.
* Guaranteed quality education for all; including free pre-kindergarten and college for all who want it.
* Immediate withdrawal from the World Trade Organization (WTO) and North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).
* Repealing the USA PATRIOT Act.
* Fostering a world of international cooperation.
* Abolishing the death penalty.
* Environmental renewal and clean energy.
* Preventing the privatization of social security.
* Providing full social security benefits at age 65.
* Creating a cabinet-level "Department of Peace"
* Ratifying the ABM Treaty and the Kyoto Protocol.
* Introducing reforms to bring about instant-runoff voting.
* Protecting a woman's right to choose while decreasing the number of abortions performed in the U.S.
* Ending the war on drugs.
* Legalizing same-sex marriage.
* Creating a balance between workers and corporations.
* Ending the H1B and L1 Visa Programs
* Restoring rural communities and family farms.
* Strengthening gun control.

I think most of those are pretty upstanding causes.

What are your opinions on Dennis Kucinich?

/,,/
Rock on!

[Eleftherios]

Although he isn't perfect, he sure it a lot better than the other candidates. Too bad the media isn't giving him the coverage he deserves. Hence, his chances of winning are extremely slim.

[Demogorgon]

Reformist! Enemy of the working class! Worse than Bush! Worse than Hitler! Seaking to make capitalism a little nicer so it lasts for ever and workers are never liberated!

I think I covered all bases there, so we won't be requiring any of that. Obviously he doesn't go far enough and his outlook is more radical social democracy than anything else, he is very good because as a member of the House Of Representatives and as a Presidential candidate he gets enough media attention to expose people to these ideas and hopefully some will go on to explore more radical ideas from that. I reckon most leftists start out with an exposure to something more moderate and then work their way from there and Kucinich is excellent for providing that sort of starting point.

Also America would do a damn site better simply with those ideas of his than it does currently, but that is obvious.

[Dimentio]

Probably as left as a mainstream politician could get.

[synthesis]

Worse than Hitler!

Kucinich is worse than Hitler?

That's one for the quote book.

[Demogorgon]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30, 2007 05:36 pm

Worse than Hitler!

Kucinich is worse than Hitler?

That's one for the quote book.
It was a joke. I was satirising the way people portra the mainstream left as worse than the right here.

[which doctor]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30, 2007 12:09 pm
I think most of those are pretty upstanding causes.
Do you think strengthening gun control is an "upstanding cause"?

Do you want the government to have a monopoly on guns?

[Rage]

I did say most.

While I know Kucinich wants to ban all handguns, and I defiantly don't agree with him on that, I do think that gun control should be strengthened.

Kucinich is the only person (that I know of) besides Ron Paul and the liberitarian party who would imediatly get out of Iraq, which is a MAJOR plus for him in my book.

/,,/
Rock on!

[Die Neue Zeit]

Originally posted by Demogorgon+September 30, 2007 10:39 am--> (Demogorgon @ September 30, 2007 10:39 am)
[email protected] 30, 2007 05:36 pm

Worse than Hitler!

Kucinich is worse than Hitler?

That's one for the quote book.
It was a joke. I was satirising the way people portra the mainstream left as worse than the right here. [/b]
That isn't a very credible way to attack the "twins" position, because the details of that position (which I support, mind you) is applicable only when the "social-democratic left" (as opposed to the "liberal left") is actually in power.

[Philosophical Materialist]

He seems OK for a social democrat, but far from perfect. He'll never have any chance to become a major player in the Democratic Party though.

[Red October]

While his platform is certainly farther left than any other major candidate's, he still can't help us out at all. Even if he got elected, which he has no chance of doing, there is no way he could do everything he says he will. I think his candidacy is interesting, but not worth getting very excited over. He just doesn't have the money, fame, or media attention to get by in America's electoral system.

[Pawn Power]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30, 2007 12:35 pm
Probably as left as a mainstream politician could get.
Probably not. I would say Ralph Nader as far as mainstream presidential canidates. In fact, the Democrats really started endorising Kuncinich in an effort to take anti-war and peace votes from Nader and bring them over to the Dems even though they know that he can't, and they don't really want, him as a canidate. There cunnying sleeze bags. Though I wouldn't vote for either.

[Eleftherios]

Originally posted by Red [email protected] 30, 2007 10:19 pm
He just doesn't have the money, fame, or media attention to get by in America's electoral system.
In fact, he was complaining to ABC that he wasn't getting equal coverage with the other candidates. ABC responded by saying that they give serious attention only to the candidates who have a good chance of winning.
Here's the source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kucinich#Press_coverage

[Demogorgon]

Originally posted by Alcaeos+September 30, 2007 10:28 pm--> (Alcaeos @ September 30, 2007 10:28 pm)
Red [email protected] 30, 2007 10:19 pm
He just doesn't have the money, fame, or media attention to get by in America's electoral system.
In fact, he was complaining to ABC that he wasn't getting equal coverage with the other candidates. ABC responded by saying that they give serious attention only to the candidates who have a good chance of winning.
Here's the source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kucinich#Press_coverage [/b]
Yet they cover Ron Paul who has even less chance of winning than Kucinich...

[YSR]

Originally posted by Demogorgon+September 30, 2007 05:55 pm--> (Demogorgon @ September 30, 2007 05:55 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected] 30, 2007 10:28 pm

Red [email protected] 30, 2007 10:19 pm
He just doesn't have the money, fame, or media attention to get by in America's electoral system.
In fact, he was complaining to ABC that he wasn't getting equal coverage with the other candidates. ABC responded by saying that they give serious attention only to the candidates who have a good chance of winning.
Here's the source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kucinich#Press_coverage
Yet they cover Ron Paul who has even less chance of winning than Kucinich... [/b]
Well, he loves him some capitalism, so that could be why.

[Red October]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30, 2007 05:28 pm
ABC responded by saying that they give serious attention only to the candidates who have a good chance of winning.
Lol, that's a pretty brutal burn for a candidate to take.

[Mkultra]

Originally posted by Red October+October 01, 2007 12:28 am--> (Red October @ October 01, 2007 12:28 am)
[email protected] 30, 2007 05:28 pm
ABC responded by saying that they give serious attention only to the candidates who have a good chance of winning.
Lol, that's a pretty brutal burn for a candidate to take. [/b]
yea but its because the media like ABC thinks they have the right to determine who the viable candidate is and not The People

[dez]

what do you guys think about christopher dobbs?

[Mkultra]

he has a full head of gray hair

[synthesis]

Originally posted by Demogorgon+September 30, 2007 10:39 am--> (Demogorgon @ September 30, 2007 10:39 am)
[email protected] 30, 2007 05:36 pm

Worse than Hitler!

Kucinich is worse than Hitler?

That's one for the quote book.
It was a joke. I was satirising the way people portra the mainstream left as worse than the right here. [/b]
Of course, my bad. I agree with you 100% and the reason I jumped on it was because it certainly sounded like something someone would say in earnest around here.

[Red October]

Originally posted by Mkultra+September 30, 2007 07:30 pm--> (Mkultra @ September 30, 2007 07:30 pm)
Originally posted by Red [email protected] 01, 2007 12:28 am

[email protected] 30, 2007 05:28 pm
ABC responded by saying that they give serious attention only to the candidates who have a good chance of winning.
Lol, that's a pretty brutal burn for a candidate to take.
yea but its because the media like ABC thinks they have the right to determine who the viable candidate is and not The People [/b]
Yes, but even if he got more media attention he wouldn't have a chance. The democratic party would never really support anyone as left wing as him for president.

[Cheung Mo]

Originally posted by Pawn Power+September 30, 2007 10:27 pm--> (Pawn Power @ September 30, 2007 10:27 pm)
[email protected] 30, 2007 12:35 pm
Probably as left as a mainstream politician could get.
Probably not. I would say Ralph Nader as far as mainstream presidential canidates. In fact, the Democrats really started endorising Kuncinich in an effort to take anti-war and peace votes from Nader and bring them over to the Dems even though they know that he can't, and they don't really want, him as a canidate. There cunnying sleeze bags. Though I wouldn't vote for either. [/b]
You give Nader too much credibility...He supported the looney tunes right on the Schiavo case and prominent Greenies have backed every fascist under the sun, from Rick Santorum to Alvaro Noboa. You won't see Kucinich shaking hands with Ecuadorean compradors who shot unionists and force 10 year old kids to work like slaves.

[manic expression]

Aside from the fact that he's a perennial loser? He's a liberal capitalist who is oblivious to the workings of the system he wants to maintain.

[Ismail]

http://realchange.org/kucinich.htm

And Cheung Mo is actually right on Nader.

http://realchange.org/nader.htm

Should be noted that page about Nader says a lot more negative stuff about him than Kucinich's page does...

[Forward Union]

He's a **** and i hope he fucking dies painfully.

[Faux Real]

What are your opinions on Dennis Kucinich?
He is a far better presidential candidate than what the CPUSA would put out. Actually, he is probably the best presidential candidate I've personally ever seen in this country.

I admire his positions, and he could very much be somewhat of a Hugo Chavez president in the 'states. Still, the most "outsider" candidate that will win the most votes would be Ron Paul/Ru Paul.

There's no way that if he even got past the primaries and the official electoral margin between he and his opponent was slim and he was winning the popular vote, that the electoral college would vote him in there. (Notice importance of the electoral college)

Besides all this, it's still not revolution, but with him in power it could make revolutionary transition a bit easier.


He's a **** and i hope he fucking dies painfully.
Why? Coz he's a fringe congressperson nobody listens to?

[Forward Union]

Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 05:57 pm
Why? Coz he's a fringe congressperson nobody listens to?
Did you read this bit; "He is a member of the U.S. House of Representatives currently and is running for president in 2008"

No need to read the rest, ****

Not to mention his campaing posters! :lol:

http://peacesunday.org/DennisKucinich.jpg

[Faux Real]

Going to print that hilarious poster out. :D

[Forward Union]

Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 05:57 pm
Besides all this, it's still not revolution, but with him in power it could make revolutionary transition a bit easier.

Don't be an idiot. Revolution would mean the working class violently seizing the means of production from the state and the capitalist class. It doesn't matter how soft and populist the rhetoric of the ruling class is, when the going gets tough the tough gets going.

Law is designed to defend property with lethal force, and takes precedence over maintaining any temporary "face" the system might have put up at any given time.

Changing the puppet will do nothing to change the system. It won't make our job any easier or tougher. Changes brought about by the ballot are superficial. Push this reformist line a litter harder and you might end up in OI!

[Faux Real]

Don't be an idiot.
Always been one!

Revolution would mean the working class violently seizing the means of production from the state and the capitalist class. It doesn't matter how soft and populist the rhetoric of the ruling class is, when the going gets tough the tough gets going.
Absolutely, what I meant by 'making it easier' are his policies that could weaken multinational corporations and force them to look for workers domestically in the US, and with their low wages which could fuel the fire of workers. Well, besides his anti-gun laws.

Law is designed to defend property with lethal force, and takes precedence over maintaining any temporary "face" the system might have put up at any given time.
Yes, those laws won't be abolished by any bourgeoisie reformist, but by the workers revolution. Never was denying that, as bourgeoisie interest would prevent any president in power to take such an act. Not to mention he probably has some himself.

Changing the puppet will do nothing to change the system.
Agreed!

Changes brought about by the ballot are superficial.
Changes *in favor of workers are superficial. They can still benefit the rich lobbyists and other special interest groups. Especially in the first world.

Push this reformist line a litter harder and you might end up in OI!
*begging on his knees to stay out of there*

My point with Kucinich is this. He has no chance in hell of winning, but I'd rather have him in presidency than Guliani, Obama, Hillary, or any other mainstream candidate. Business interest wouldn't likely let him carry out his reforms anyway.

In the end, revolution > any presidential candidate.

[Rage]

Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 05:57 pm
Still, the most "outsider" candidate that will win the most votes would be Ron Paul/Ru Paul.
I know more people supporting Kucinich then Ron Paul.

The only thing the two have in common is that they both want to end the Iraq war instantly, as opposed to some bull shit plan where we "slowly reduce the number of troops".

/,,/
Rock on!

[Red October]

Ron Paul is the republican version of Dennis Kucinich. Both have unpopular platforms, a plan to withdraw from Iraq, and no chance of winning. But Ron Paul is a free market douche.

[Luís Henrique]

He isn't worse than Bush, he isn't worse than Hitler, and he isn't a social-democrat; being a social-democrat requires a different relationship with the working class, that no American Democrat can have. It requires being member of a party in which unions and their bureaucracy have an actual say, instead of a party that is periodically endorsed by unions as a lesser evil.

The greatest problem with American mainstream politics is the iron grip the two State parties have over the system. Breaking that, even with a moderate candidate, would be a greater gain than electing a more radical Democrat.

But neither are going to happen. Politicians like Kucinich (or Paul, for different reasons) can only succeed in times of harsher proletarian resistance. With the working class taking defeat after defeat with so little struggle, the Kerries of this world are free to find a way to lose to some Bush.

Luís Henrique

[MarxSchmarx]

One of the guy's platforms is to "Save Capitalism"

http://www.dennis4president.com/go/issues/saving-capitalism/
<_<

[Sir Aunty Christ]

I like his wife....

...anyhew, in the (very unlikely) event of him becoming President he may well go into the White House with the best of intentions but Congress, the self-interest of lobbyists, hawks who rabbit on about "national security" and a conservative Supreme Court would severely hamper his chances of doing anything he&#39;d planned to do.

[which doctor]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30, 2007 01:12 pm


Kucinich is the only person (that I know of) besides Ron Paul and the liberitarian party who would imediatly get out of Iraq, which is a MAJOR plus for him in my book.
I suggest you research Mike Gravel, who is similar to Kucinich.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

How many times can this come up here?

Kucinich serves to tie left-leaning workers and young people to the capitalist Democratic Party.

It works like this:

Kucinich puts forward some mildly radical rhetoric, which gains him the support of the above mentioned sections of society.

Kucinich gets many of these supporters to actively campaign for him.

Kucinich losses the primaries, and then endorses whoever wins them (i.e. Hilary).

Kucinich&#39;s supporters follow suit and vote for the Democratic candidate, falling into the pit of lesser evilism.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Breaking that, even with a moderate candidate, would be a greater gain than electing a more radical Democrat.

And that (liberal) outlook is what lead the International Socialist Organization to back anti-immigrant, pro-capitalist Ralph Nader of the small-capitalist Green Party.

Communists fight for the political independence of the working class. We don&#39;t struggle to break a system of two alternating capitalist parties by adding a third&#33;

[Orange Juche]

Originally posted by FoB+September 30, 2007 01:58 pm--> (FoB @ September 30, 2007 01:58 pm)
[email protected] 30, 2007 12:09 pm
I think most of those are pretty upstanding causes.
Do you think strengthening gun control is an "upstanding cause"?

Do you want the government to have a monopoly on guns? [/b]
He said "most"

[Dros]

Haven&#39;t we gotten over the idea that the Democrats will do anything? Beyond the fact that they have no programme, no stratedgy, and no real beliefs, they are JUST ANOTHER BUNCH OF BOURGOISIE CAPITALISTS who perpetuate the system of exploitation. Dennis K is at best going to make the system slightly better for the proletariat which (while being a good thing in some ways) can in some ways detract from revolutionary movements by providing the illusion that there is some sort of way to change capitalism through liberal "democracy".

The Democrats WON&#39;T save you.