Posted by Pam Spaulding January 24, 2008 in Uncategorized, Election, Democrats
One of the only two Democrats running for president who supported full marriage equality* is leaving the race. Dennis Kucinich faces a primary challenge back home in Ohio for his seat in Congress (10th district), so he’s bowing out.
He gave an interview with the Cleveland Plain Dealer about his official announcement, which will be at a news conference tomorrow.
As if presidential dark horse Dennis Kucinich didn’t have enough problems with his White House run, now he appears to be panicking over the spirited primary challengers seeking his seat in the House. Cleveland City Councilman Joe Cimperman and North Olmstead Mayor Thomas O’Grady kicked off primary challenges last month, amid rising complaints that Kucinich’s quest for higher office and his crusades to impeach Vice President Cheney have left the people of his district neglected. But in Kucinich land, the political landscape is never so simple.Congressman Kucinich said “I’m transitioning out of the presidential campaign” in the above video, and that he will not endorse a candidate.
—
* The other was Mike Gravel.
31 Responses to “Dennis Kucinich drops out”
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
I’ll miss him, but he had far less of an impact this time around than he did last time, in part, I think, because John Edwards stole a lot of his thunder. And the field as a whole, this time around, is a lot farther elft than it was in 2008 because of him.
Too bad. I guess potentially the candidates might move left a bit trying to pick up his voters.
That quote seems slanted against him, incidentally. Set my teeth grinding. I was just feeling fondly toward him for using the word “lie” on the House floor.
Like I said, he’s been an excellent voice against the war on the national level, although I have heard a lot (from liberals and moderates as well as the right) that he also neglected the city of Cleveland as mayor (this was before I was born, so I don’t know firsthand.) Although I’m not sure how much of the problems he faced were after-effects from the ‘Nam war (I refuse to blame Jimmy Carter much for the national problems in the late ’70s either.)
Whenever I take one of those on-line blind questionnaires that ask you where you stand on issues and then match you with a candidate, it’s always Kucinich. It’s like always getting someone you find unattractive from a dating service.
Don’t get me wrong—I voted for the guy in the 2004 primary (by then, Kerry had it locked up). But I just don’t think he has the presence, the charisma, to be President. It’s not just about making good decisions, it’s about inspiring people.
OK. Bye Dennis.
He’s really a national hero. If he was your ideal candidate (based on the sum of his positions) then you’ll *love* his impeachment resolution! He’s bringing articles against Bush on January 28, to follow up on the ones against Cheney that are currently submerged in the House Judiciary Committee.
I think he’ll be a lot more effective in the House. Who knows; if he hadn’t been running for President, we might have gotten an ENDA that really worked for gender discrimination.
Ugh. I was going to vote for Dennis in the primary, so now I have to figure out which watered-down equality-denying sack of potatoes will earn my vote. Can I still just write in Kucinich? (I’m not registered as a Democrat, but, here in California, independents can submit a Democratic ballot. Maybe I’ll skip voting for a presidential candidate altogether.)
For the record, Kucinich’s attendance and voting rate is among the highest in the House and far and away higher than any other primary candidate. Accusing him of neglecting his post is just a convenient excuse.
Shoot. I wish he were endorsing someone… now I don’t know who to support
And I guess I’ll have to take off my Kucinich bumper sticker, too:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jan_andrea/2041723400/in/set-1299808/
Rats.
You can probably kiss him good-bye in congress too. I live in his district and he is none too popular right now. He faces 4 other democrats in the primary for his seat. He has a reputation as a “do nothing” representative more interested in his quixotic and self-aggrandizing runs for president.
I would like to see Dennis Kucinich and Cynthia McKinney together on the Green party ticket.
^^ You think? I haven’t seen any polling, but he probably can out-fundraise all of the candidates, and likely would get the backing of most state and local Democrats.
I do think he can’t advance any higher than the House; the only prominent GOP politician he would probably take on the statewide level is Bob Taft. He’d be awfully hard-pressed to even beat Blackwell, much as I hate to say it.
The large number of primary challengers should protect Kucinich from losing that contest. The anti-Kucinich, pro-war, homophobe votes will be split.
Rebecca, if you’re in CA, you can still vote for Kucinich, because he’s already on the ballot.
I do think he can’t advance any higher than the House; the only prominent GOP politician he would probably take on the statewide level is Bob Taft. He’d be awfully hard-pressed to even beat Blackwell, much as I hate to say it.
It’s 2008, not 2006. Neither of them are in office any more.
It does say a lot about who Kucinich’s natural base is: people who don’t have to deal with him representing them.
“The large number of primary challengers should protect Kucinich from losing that contest. The anti-Kucinich, pro-war, homophobe votes will be split.”
Well, there might still be some behind-the-scenes efforts for them to push one another out of the race and concentrate the vote. It all depends on fundraising, endorsements, and plain old backscratching.
Honestly, I’m not sure that there are that many socially conservative/pro-war Dems in the 10th district; the suburbs like Bay Village, Westlake, Strongsville, a bit of Solon, etc. aren’t socially conservative even on the GOP side, and areas like Lakewood would probably be pro-Kucinich across the board. The inner-ring suburbs and the city itself might break more socially conservative though among Dems.
(Apologies to anyone besides Pablo who’s unfamiliar with/bored by my listing Cleveland area stuff. For those interested in the specifics of Ohio politics, you can find the district boundaries on wikipedia…)
I won’t miss him. Though right on some of the issues, he was a flake. Any person who would state publicly that Ron Paul, candidate of white supremacists, virulently anti-choice despite his alleged libertarianism, pro-19th century gold standard economics, might mike a jim-dandy vice president is a flake.
Local Crank,
That’s not flakiness, it’s desperation. Kucinich was never going to get the nomination and he knew it, so he was free to say whatever came into his head no matter what the implications. His noted affection for Ron Paul was a result of their similar situation: not going to win, not very influential in their parties’ primaries, and willing to make affectations of disloyalty to their parties to increase their own pet issues’ influence. Kucinich thought he could make a faux alliance with Paul so they could each scare their party into dealing with their issues. When the nation is as evenly divided as it has been over the past few elections, it could have been an effective threat if not for a few meddlesome factors: Kucinich’s irrelevancy, Paul’s good fundraising, and the fact that the two really don’t have much in common politically aside from a dislike of the status quo.
HonoreDB wrote:
Both of them?
Serena Kitt wrote:
Well, you saw just how far Mr Kucinich’s articles of impeachment against the Vice President went; what would make anyone think that articles of impeachment against President Bush would go any further?
President Bush has 361 days left in his term. Even if articles of impeachment were passed against him, and by some miracle y’all got the 16 Republican senators you’d need to go along and vote for removal, you’d cut out what, maybe six months of President Bush’s term? And then you’d have your fondest desire, President Richard Cheney!
I would think that a conservative such as yourself would understand the importance of symbols. A symbolic gesture of impeachment still goes some distance in reminding the world today and history tomorrow that the crimes of this administration were not endorsed by all.
I agree with jon @ 16.
I don’t know what people are talking about when they said he wasn’t inspiring. He inspired me: he was the one who revitilized my hope that politiicians were in it for more than just themselves.
“A symbolic gesture of impeachment still goes some distance in reminding the world today and history tomorrow that the crimes of this administration were not endorsed by all.”
…and I’m sure Dana heartily supports the important truth of that statement - except Dana’s referring to the Clinton administration.
Dana doesn’t think the Cheney/Bush administration has done ANYTHING wrong, unless it’s been TOO compassionately conservative. Dana knows that sometimes the president needs to be a real hardass to get things done.
In fact, if those
cravenanti-populistfarsighted Republicanidiotsvisionaries hadn’tforcedconvinced Harry Truman to sign the 22nd Amendment, which limited presidents to two terms, Dana would gleefully vote for Cheney/Bush again (and again, and again, and again…). Just ask him!So Dana is all in favor of symbolic gestures.
And like all good Pandagonians, I’m sending Dana a symbolic gesture right now! (involving my middle finger…)
I’m sorry, but that’s just such a spectacularly stupid statement, even if it explains why people vote for George W “Great guy to have a beer with” Bush.
To paraphrase Kucinich himself, you can have a president who stands for the right principals, or you can have one that’s tall.
We don’t even have that with the shrimp in office.
Dana, we have to impeach Cheney first, especially since he’s masterminded most of the crimes. They both need to go. Investigations and prosecutions need to happen even if it’s after they’ve left office.
They’ve committed crimes against the country and damaged her and her citizens. They need to pay, and it will be a real shame if we have to leave it up to The Hague to do it for us.
Dana,
I believe Bush and Cheney are both criminals, on a massive scale, with repeated counts of separate, multiple offenses, which all bear directly on their performance of their public office and which have had drastic, often fatal, consequences for Americans and people overseas, and which will cost us all dearly in both money and reputation for generations to come. They may well have sent the USA into a downward spiral that we may never recover from, with tragic consequences for us and people all over the world. I’m enough of a patriot to believe that.
Therefore justice against them, no matter how long delayed, is better than their walking off scot-free.
It’s more than I expect to happen at this point. But it will never be too late, in my opinion, for them to be tried, convicted, and punished.
If this just makes them the right-wing mirror-image of FDR or the Warren Court–very well, remind us again of the legacy of good work I’m supposed to be overlooking in my supposedly partisan zeal.
I could point out that on the pro-Bush side one finds people who think Abraham Lincoln was Teh Evil. So if it is a matter of just choosing sides–well, I like my side better.
Oh, Pablo, please. Stop it with the “do nothing” bullshit about Kucinich. You say you live in his district? (I do, too). Have you ever actually reached out to his office for help on something? There is *immediate* response from a well-trained staff of constituent advocates who — gasp — know what the hell they’re talking about on just about every issue.
Letting someone like that in-the-back-pockets-of-the-downtown-developer-mafia frat boy Cimperman get elected would be a damned shame. And when I heard Rosemary Palmer campaigning against Kucinich, I wanted to throw things at the television. She told an older lady who said she liked Kucinich and planned to vote for him that “well, things we like aren’t always good for us.” Give me a frickin’ break, lady. Nanny somewhere else.
When the local gas company neglected to read our meter for over a year (violating Ohio utility codes) then tried to say we owed them over $2000 (we didn’t), Kucinich’s office stepped up to help. When my future mother in law needed to get on an emergency flight to Hungary for her mother’s funeral, the woman in charge of immigration-related issues at Kucinich’s office helped us figure out if it would cause any problems with her ongoing citizenship application.
There are hundreds, probably thousands of stories just like mine of people who have been helped by Kucinich, advocated for by Kucinich, etc. He’s anything but “do nothing.”
By contrast, Cimperman is a cheap politico with a taste for drama and a craving for approval from his developer pals. And his campaign’s behavior has been less than honorable:
http://www.buckeyestateblog.com/cimperman_gets_nailed_by_local_press
“That’s not flakiness, it’s desperation. Kucinich was never going to get the nomination and he knew it, so he was free to say whatever came into his head no matter what the implications.”
To me, that’s even more damning. If he was willing to throw in with a neo-Nazi backed, racist, anti-semitic character like Paul as a publicity stunt, that says even more about his lack of fitness for the office he sought and his lack of real commitment to the ideals he proclaimed so loudly.
And speaking of stunts, I agree that there is no way impeachment was ever going go happen and certainly no chance now. Sadly, Bush and Cheney will leave office, segue back into the corporate world, make tons more money and never give a second thought to the disaster they left behind. They will never ever be called to account for any of it, either. That’s not just, of course, but the important thing is, they will leave office.
See video: Kucinich Drops Out and Doesn’t Endorse Anyone
http://representativepress.googlepages.com/DropOut.html
Ace- I’m just telling you what i’ve heard on the street and read in the local papers. I had a much higher opinion of Kucinich myself before i moved into his district about 3 months ago. But if you examine his actual record of non-accomplishment in the House of Rep then you can really see the local’s point.
If I had a left nut, I would give it, to have Mike Gravel win the presidency. Unfortunately, it doesn’t look like he has a snowball’s chance in hell.
He was the highest ranking vegan politician in the US. For the millions of American vegans, we can only hope more will come.
Pablo, you’re missing the point here — he’s an actual advocate for his constituents. That he isn’t a pork barrel Alaska-bridge-to-nowhere Congressperson is a *good* thing. Cimperman and the others aren’t going to do anything more than he does and I find it difficult to believe they’ll improve on his direct outreach record, too.
No surprise…