For the Anybody But Bush folks

[Sarah]

From: "briank20032003" <snip>
To: <***@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 3:11 PM
Subject: [USDemocrat2] Kucinich most likely to beat Bush


There are those people in the Democratic Party whose primary concern
is choosing the nominee that is most likely to beat George Bush. I've
heard these people referred to as "Anybody But Bush Again" people or
(ABBAs). They are concerned about getting the votes in the "center"
of the political spectrum.

So I ask, how many of the people who would choose John Kerry, Howard
Dean, or Dick Gephardt over George Bush, would in a race between
Dennis Kucinich and George Bush choose Bush? I suggest very, very
few. This "center" that ABBAs worry about is imaginary, it's hollow.
What ABBAs should realize is that they, themselves, are the true
"center," and by their own admission, they'll choose ANY Democrat over
Bush. So this election will not be won by Democrats by choosing a
nominee that is least different from Bush in order to appeal to an
imaginary "center," but by choosing a nominee that appeals to the
"left." The left out that is.

There are tens of millions of people in this country who don't vote.
They don't vote because they don't think it makes a difference. The
way you get their vote is by producing as nominee the candidate that
is MOST different from Bush. On jobs, healthcare, education, energy,
foreign policy, campaign finance reform, the environment, and reducing
the Pentagon budget, that candidate is Dennis Kucinich.

Furthermore, if ABBAs dislike Bush so much, I would think on
principles they would be most in agreement with Kucinich.

Also, Kucinich is 3-0 running against Republican incumbents. He
defeated a Republican incumbent when he was elected Mayor of
Cleveland, when he won a seat in the Ohio State Senate, and when he
was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives. He is able to garner
support from Reagan Democrats and moderate Republicans at the same
time that he appeals to traditional Democrats, Ralph Nader supporters,
and independents. That's why he got 74 percent of the vote in his
last re-election.

Another important factor to consider is that Kucinich comes from the
swing-state of Ohio which will have 20 electoral votes in the 2004
election. Republicans have never won the Presidency without winning
Ohio. With Kucinich as nominee, Bush will not win Ohio. By
comparison, Howard Dean's home state of Vermont only has 3 electoral
votes.

Al Gore lost the 2000 election because he tried to appeal to the
imaginary, hollow "center," rather than the needs of the tens of
millions of hard-working Americans who are disenchanted with the
political process. Let us, as Democrats, not make that mistake again.

The best chance Democrats have of taking back the White House in 2004
is to nominate Dennis Kucinich, the candidate who advocates a full
employment economy. His administration will create public works jobs
rebuilding America's schools, roads, bridges, water systems, sewer
systems, and communication and energy infrastructures. Kucinich is
the candidate who will withdraw from NAFTA and the WTO and instead
protect American jobs, workers' rights, human rights, and the
environment with fair bilateral trade agreements. A Kucinich
administration will support and promote family farmers rather than
corporate agribusiness. And Kucinich will roll the Social Security
retirement age back to 65.

The Kucinich healthcare plan is the one that guarantees to provide
total healthcare for all from cradle to grave with no premiums, no
deductibles, and no co-pays (and no multi-million dollar salaries for
insurance company CEOs). Dennis Kucinich will repeal the part of
Bush's tax cuts that went to the rich. A Kucinich White House will
provide pre-K for all three, four, and five-year olds, as well as free
{note-this is not a positive yet - they are still crunching the
numbers} tuition for America's young people at public colleges and
universities.

Dennis Kucinich will support solar, wind, hydrogen, bio-mass, and
other renewable and environmentally-friendly energy sources that will
make America less dependent on foreign oil. He will have a foreign
policy based on friendly cooperation and respect for the international
rule of law, rather than one based on fear, lies, and unwarranted
aggression.

The Kucinich campaign practices public financing and takes no
corporate donations. Kucinich will force the FCC to demand that media
networks provide free TV time to national candidates. This is real
campaign finance reform that will eliminate the need for candidates to
accept corporate money in order to raise the big-bucks currently
needed to get on TV.

And most importantly, Kucinich will reduce the currently unaudited
Pentagon budget by fifteen percent by eliminating wasteful projects
that aren't needed and don't work anyway. The Pentagon can't account
for over one-TRILLION dollars of spent, or more accurately, misspent,
taxpayer money. Now that's an outrage. What's even more outrageous is
that there are other Democratic candidates, such as Dean, that won't
touch the Pentagon budget. Dennis Kucinich, on the other hand, sees
the waste, and as our next President will put an end to it.

As Dennis Kucinich says, "It's not about the (political) labels. It's
about, 'What do the people need?'" And Dennis Kucinich is in tune
with what the people need, and that is why Dennis Kucinich is the most
electable Democratic candidate for President

[Douglas Otis]

"Sarah" <newsgroupsdon'***@virtualnow.mailshell.com> wrote:

Dear Sarah,

Remember Bush has used his influence to raise a substantial campaign
fund and is also good at using scare tactics. Although I like many of
the ideas of Dennis, I think some of his ideas are too revolutionary
rather than evolutionary. For this reason, I feel Howard Dean has a
better chance as it provides less fuel to the well funded fear monger.
Perhaps it could be VP Kucinich?

Doug

Post by Sarah
From: "briank20032003" <snip>
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 3:11 PM
Subject: [USDemocrat2] Kucinich most likely to beat Bush
There are those people in the Democratic Party whose primary concern
is choosing the nominee that is most likely to beat George Bush. I've
heard these people referred to as "Anybody But Bush Again" people or
(ABBAs). They are concerned about getting the votes in the "center"
of the political spectrum.
So I ask, how many of the people who would choose John Kerry, Howard
Dean, or Dick Gephardt over George Bush, would in a race between
Dennis Kucinich and George Bush choose Bush? I suggest very, very
few. This "center" that ABBAs worry about is imaginary, it's hollow.
What ABBAs should realize is that they, themselves, are the true
"center," and by their own admission, they'll choose ANY Democrat over
Bush. So this election will not be won by Democrats by choosing a
nominee that is least different from Bush in order to appeal to an
imaginary "center," but by choosing a nominee that appeals to the
"left." The left out that is.
There are tens of millions of people in this country who don't vote.
They don't vote because they don't think it makes a difference. The
way you get their vote is by producing as nominee the candidate that
is MOST different from Bush. On jobs, healthcare, education, energy,
foreign policy, campaign finance reform, the environment, and reducing
the Pentagon budget, that candidate is Dennis Kucinich.
Furthermore, if ABBAs dislike Bush so much, I would think on
principles they would be most in agreement with Kucinich.
Also, Kucinich is 3-0 running against Republican incumbents. He
defeated a Republican incumbent when he was elected Mayor of
Cleveland, when he won a seat in the Ohio State Senate, and when he
was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives. He is able to garner
support from Reagan Democrats and moderate Republicans at the same
time that he appeals to traditional Democrats, Ralph Nader supporters,
and independents. That's why he got 74 percent of the vote in his
last re-election.
Another important factor to consider is that Kucinich comes from the
swing-state of Ohio which will have 20 electoral votes in the 2004
election. Republicans have never won the Presidency without winning
Ohio. With Kucinich as nominee, Bush will not win Ohio. By
comparison, Howard Dean's home state of Vermont only has 3 electoral
votes.
Al Gore lost the 2000 election because he tried to appeal to the
imaginary, hollow "center," rather than the needs of the tens of
millions of hard-working Americans who are disenchanted with the
political process. Let us, as Democrats, not make that mistake again.
The best chance Democrats have of taking back the White House in 2004
is to nominate Dennis Kucinich, the candidate who advocates a full
employment economy. His administration will create public works jobs
rebuilding America's schools, roads, bridges, water systems, sewer
systems, and communication and energy infrastructures. Kucinich is
the candidate who will withdraw from NAFTA and the WTO and instead
protect American jobs, workers' rights, human rights, and the
environment with fair bilateral trade agreements. A Kucinich
administration will support and promote family farmers rather than
corporate agribusiness. And Kucinich will roll the Social Security
retirement age back to 65.
The Kucinich healthcare plan is the one that guarantees to provide
total healthcare for all from cradle to grave with no premiums, no
deductibles, and no co-pays (and no multi-million dollar salaries for
insurance company CEOs). Dennis Kucinich will repeal the part of
Bush's tax cuts that went to the rich. A Kucinich White House will
provide pre-K for all three, four, and five-year olds, as well as free
{note-this is not a positive yet - they are still crunching the
numbers} tuition for America's young people at public colleges and
universities.
Dennis Kucinich will support solar, wind, hydrogen, bio-mass, and
other renewable and environmentally-friendly energy sources that will
make America less dependent on foreign oil. He will have a foreign
policy based on friendly cooperation and respect for the international
rule of law, rather than one based on fear, lies, and unwarranted
aggression.
The Kucinich campaign practices public financing and takes no
corporate donations. Kucinich will force the FCC to demand that media
networks provide free TV time to national candidates. This is real
campaign finance reform that will eliminate the need for candidates to
accept corporate money in order to raise the big-bucks currently
needed to get on TV.
And most importantly, Kucinich will reduce the currently unaudited
Pentagon budget by fifteen percent by eliminating wasteful projects
that aren't needed and don't work anyway. The Pentagon can't account
for over one-TRILLION dollars of spent, or more accurately, misspent,
taxpayer money. Now that's an outrage. What's even more outrageous is
that there are other Democratic candidates, such as Dean, that won't
touch the Pentagon budget. Dennis Kucinich, on the other hand, sees
the waste, and as our next President will put an end to it.
As Dennis Kucinich says, "It's not about the (political) labels. It's
about, 'What do the people need?'" And Dennis Kucinich is in tune
with what the people need, and that is why Dennis Kucinich is the most
electable Democratic candidate for President

[Bert Bishop]

Post by Douglas Otis
Dear Sarah,
Remember Bush has used his influence to raise a substantial campaign
fund and is also good at using scare tactics. Although I like many of
the ideas of Dennis, I think some of his ideas are too revolutionary
rather than evolutionary. For this reason, I feel Howard Dean has a
better chance as it provides less fuel to the well funded fear monger.
Perhaps it could be VP Kucinich?
Doug

Post by Sarah
From: "briank20032003" <snip>
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 3:11 PM
Subject: [USDemocrat2] Kucinich most likely to beat Bush
There are those people in the Democratic Party whose primary concern
is choosing the nominee that is most likely to beat George Bush. I've
heard these people referred to as "Anybody But Bush Again" people or
(ABBAs). They are concerned about getting the votes in the "center"
of the political spectrum.
So I ask, how many of the people who would choose John Kerry, Howard
Dean, or Dick Gephardt over George Bush, would in a race between
Dennis Kucinich and George Bush choose Bush? I suggest very, very
few. This "center" that ABBAs worry about is imaginary, it's hollow.
What ABBAs should realize is that they, themselves, are the true
"center," and by their own admission, they'll choose ANY Democrat over
Bush. So this election will not be won by Democrats by choosing a
nominee that is least different from Bush in order to appeal to an
imaginary "center," but by choosing a nominee that appeals to the
"left." The left out that is.
There are tens of millions of people in this country who don't vote.
They don't vote because they don't think it makes a difference. The
way you get their vote is by producing as nominee the candidate that
is MOST different from Bush. On jobs, healthcare, education, energy,
foreign policy, campaign finance reform, the environment, and reducing
the Pentagon budget, that candidate is Dennis Kucinich.
Furthermore, if ABBAs dislike Bush so much, I would think on
principles they would be most in agreement with Kucinich.
Also, Kucinich is 3-0 running against Republican incumbents. He
defeated a Republican incumbent when he was elected Mayor of
Cleveland, when he won a seat in the Ohio State Senate, and when he
was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives. He is able to garner
support from Reagan Democrats and moderate Republicans at the same
time that he appeals to traditional Democrats, Ralph Nader supporters,
and independents. That's why he got 74 percent of the vote in his
last re-election.
Another important factor to consider is that Kucinich comes from the
swing-state of Ohio which will have 20 electoral votes in the 2004
election. Republicans have never won the Presidency without winning
Ohio. With Kucinich as nominee, Bush will not win Ohio. By
comparison, Howard Dean's home state of Vermont only has 3 electoral
votes.
Al Gore lost the 2000 election because he tried to appeal to the
imaginary, hollow "center," rather than the needs of the tens of
millions of hard-working Americans who are disenchanted with the
political process. Let us, as Democrats, not make that mistake again.
The best chance Democrats have of taking back the White House in 2004
is to nominate Dennis Kucinich, the candidate who advocates a full
employment economy. His administration will create public works jobs
rebuilding America's schools, roads, bridges, water systems, sewer
systems, and communication and energy infrastructures. Kucinich is
the candidate who will withdraw from NAFTA and the WTO and instead
protect American jobs, workers' rights, human rights, and the
environment with fair bilateral trade agreements. A Kucinich
administration will support and promote family farmers rather than
corporate agribusiness. And Kucinich will roll the Social Security
retirement age back to 65.
The Kucinich healthcare plan is the one that guarantees to provide
total healthcare for all from cradle to grave with no premiums, no
deductibles, and no co-pays (and no multi-million dollar salaries for
insurance company CEOs). Dennis Kucinich will repeal the part of
Bush's tax cuts that went to the rich. A Kucinich White House will
provide pre-K for all three, four, and five-year olds, as well as free
{note-this is not a positive yet - they are still crunching the
numbers} tuition for America's young people at public colleges and
universities.
Dennis Kucinich will support solar, wind, hydrogen, bio-mass, and
other renewable and environmentally-friendly energy sources that will
make America less dependent on foreign oil. He will have a foreign
policy based on friendly cooperation and respect for the international
rule of law, rather than one based on fear, lies, and unwarranted
aggression.
The Kucinich campaign practices public financing and takes no
corporate donations. Kucinich will force the FCC to demand that media
networks provide free TV time to national candidates. This is real
campaign finance reform that will eliminate the need for candidates to
accept corporate money in order to raise the big-bucks currently
needed to get on TV.
And most importantly, Kucinich will reduce the currently unaudited
Pentagon budget by fifteen percent by eliminating wasteful projects
that aren't needed and don't work anyway. The Pentagon can't account
for over one-TRILLION dollars of spent, or more accurately, misspent,
taxpayer money. Now that's an outrage. What's even more outrageous is
that there are other Democratic candidates, such as Dean, that won't
touch the Pentagon budget. Dennis Kucinich, on the other hand, sees
the waste, and as our next President will put an end to it.
As Dennis Kucinich says, "It's not about the (political) labels. It's
about, 'What do the people need?'" And Dennis Kucinich is in tune
with what the people need, and that is why Dennis Kucinich is the most
electable Democratic candidate for President

Some of us ABBAs believe that Kucinich is one of the weakest candidates
(of the 9) that the Dems could run, but the Kucinich could win
nonetheless. Indeed the political center is exaggerated, but it does
exist. Some of us are waiting for the Democratic nominee to become
clearly defined until we put our energy and limited money into the
race. Then we can support whichever candidate the Dems put up. Any of
them, even the incompetent CMB would be better than Bush. Those who
invest a great deal in one of the 8 disappointed candidates now will not
bring the required energy next fall to help defeat Bush. The question
isn't which of the Dems is best, it is will we all be behind that
candidate when the time comes. Will Sarah support Lieberman if he
becomes the candidate? Will she post passionate requests for people to
vote for the Democratic Presidential Candidiate when it counts most. I
hope so.

[Sarah]

Post by Bert Bishop

Post by Douglas Otis
Dear Sarah,
Remember Bush has used his influence to raise a substantial

campaign

Post by Bert Bishop

Post by Douglas Otis
fund and is also good at using scare tactics. Although I like many of
the ideas of Dennis, I think some of his ideas are too

revolutionary

Post by Bert Bishop

Post by Douglas Otis
rather than evolutionary. For this reason, I feel Howard Dean has a
better chance as it provides less fuel to the well funded fear monger.
Perhaps it could be VP Kucinich?
Doug

Post by Sarah
From: "briank20032003" <snip>
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 3:11 PM
Subject: [USDemocrat2] Kucinich most likely to beat Bush
There are those people in the Democratic Party whose primary concern
is choosing the nominee that is most likely to beat George Bush. I've
heard these people referred to as "Anybody But Bush Again"

people or

Post by Bert Bishop

Post by Douglas Otis

Post by Sarah
(ABBAs). They are concerned about getting the votes in the "center"
of the political spectrum.
So I ask, how many of the people who would choose John Kerry, Howard
Dean, or Dick Gephardt over George Bush, would in a race between
Dennis Kucinich and George Bush choose Bush? I suggest very, very
few. This "center" that ABBAs worry about is imaginary, it's hollow.
What ABBAs should realize is that they, themselves, are the true
"center," and by their own admission, they'll choose ANY

Democrat over

Post by Bert Bishop

Post by Douglas Otis

Post by Sarah
Bush. So this election will not be won by Democrats by choosing a
nominee that is least different from Bush in order to appeal to an
imaginary "center," but by choosing a nominee that appeals to the
"left." The left out that is.
There are tens of millions of people in this country who don't vote.
They don't vote because they don't think it makes a difference. The
way you get their vote is by producing as nominee the candidate that
is MOST different from Bush. On jobs, healthcare, education, energy,
foreign policy, campaign finance reform, the environment, and reducing
the Pentagon budget, that candidate is Dennis Kucinich.
Furthermore, if ABBAs dislike Bush so much, I would think on
principles they would be most in agreement with Kucinich.
Also, Kucinich is 3-0 running against Republican incumbents. He
defeated a Republican incumbent when he was elected Mayor of
Cleveland, when he won a seat in the Ohio State Senate, and when he
was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives. He is able to garner
support from Reagan Democrats and moderate Republicans at the same
time that he appeals to traditional Democrats, Ralph Nader

supporters,

Post by Bert Bishop

Post by Douglas Otis

Post by Sarah
and independents. That's why he got 74 percent of the vote in his
last re-election.
Another important factor to consider is that Kucinich comes from the
swing-state of Ohio which will have 20 electoral votes in the 2004
election. Republicans have never won the Presidency without winning
Ohio. With Kucinich as nominee, Bush will not win Ohio. By
comparison, Howard Dean's home state of Vermont only has 3

electoral

Post by Bert Bishop

Post by Douglas Otis

Post by Sarah
votes.
Al Gore lost the 2000 election because he tried to appeal to the
imaginary, hollow "center," rather than the needs of the tens of
millions of hard-working Americans who are disenchanted with the
political process. Let us, as Democrats, not make that mistake again.
The best chance Democrats have of taking back the White House in 2004
is to nominate Dennis Kucinich, the candidate who advocates a full
employment economy. His administration will create public works jobs
rebuilding America's schools, roads, bridges, water systems, sewer
systems, and communication and energy infrastructures. Kucinich is
the candidate who will withdraw from NAFTA and the WTO and

instead

Post by Bert Bishop

Post by Douglas Otis

Post by Sarah
protect American jobs, workers' rights, human rights, and the
environment with fair bilateral trade agreements. A Kucinich
administration will support and promote family farmers rather than
corporate agribusiness. And Kucinich will roll the Social

Security

Post by Bert Bishop

Post by Douglas Otis

Post by Sarah
retirement age back to 65.
The Kucinich healthcare plan is the one that guarantees to

provide

Post by Bert Bishop

Post by Douglas Otis

Post by Sarah
total healthcare for all from cradle to grave with no premiums, no
deductibles, and no co-pays (and no multi-million dollar

salaries for

Post by Bert Bishop

Post by Douglas Otis

Post by Sarah
insurance company CEOs). Dennis Kucinich will repeal the part of
Bush's tax cuts that went to the rich. A Kucinich White House will
provide pre-K for all three, four, and five-year olds, as well as free
{note-this is not a positive yet - they are still crunching the
numbers} tuition for America's young people at public colleges and
universities.
Dennis Kucinich will support solar, wind, hydrogen, bio-mass, and
other renewable and environmentally-friendly energy sources that will
make America less dependent on foreign oil. He will have a

foreign

Post by Bert Bishop

Post by Douglas Otis

Post by Sarah
policy based on friendly cooperation and respect for the

international

Post by Bert Bishop

Post by Douglas Otis

Post by Sarah
rule of law, rather than one based on fear, lies, and

unwarranted

Post by Bert Bishop

Post by Douglas Otis

Post by Sarah
aggression.
The Kucinich campaign practices public financing and takes no
corporate donations. Kucinich will force the FCC to demand that media
networks provide free TV time to national candidates. This is real
campaign finance reform that will eliminate the need for

candidates to

Post by Bert Bishop

Post by Douglas Otis

Post by Sarah
accept corporate money in order to raise the big-bucks currently
needed to get on TV.
And most importantly, Kucinich will reduce the currently

unaudited

Post by Bert Bishop

Post by Douglas Otis

Post by Sarah
Pentagon budget by fifteen percent by eliminating wasteful

projects

Post by Bert Bishop

Post by Douglas Otis

Post by Sarah
that aren't needed and don't work anyway. The Pentagon can't account
for over one-TRILLION dollars of spent, or more accurately, misspent,
taxpayer money. Now that's an outrage. What's even more

outrageous is

Post by Bert Bishop

Post by Douglas Otis

Post by Sarah
that there are other Democratic candidates, such as Dean, that won't
touch the Pentagon budget. Dennis Kucinich, on the other hand, sees
the waste, and as our next President will put an end to it.
As Dennis Kucinich says, "It's not about the (political) labels. It's
about, 'What do the people need?'" And Dennis Kucinich is in tune
with what the people need, and that is why Dennis Kucinich is the most
electable Democratic candidate for President

Some of us ABBAs believe that Kucinich is one of the weakest

candidates

Post by Bert Bishop
(of the 9) that the Dems could run, but the Kucinich could win
nonetheless. Indeed the political center is exaggerated, but it does
exist. Some of us are waiting for the Democratic nominee to become
clearly defined until we put our energy and limited money into the
race. Then we can support whichever candidate the Dems put up. Any of
them, even the incompetent CMB would be better than Bush. Those who
invest a great deal in one of the 8 disappointed candidates now will not
bring the required energy next fall to help defeat Bush. The

question

Post by Bert Bishop
isn't which of the Dems is best, it is will we all be behind that
candidate when the time comes. Will Sarah support Lieberman if he
becomes the candidate? Will she post passionate requests for people to
vote for the Democratic Presidential Candidiate when it counts most.

I

Post by Bert Bishop
hope so.

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

Midge Miller: Kucinich's record shows he's an antidote to Bush

http://www.madison.com/captimes/opinion/column/guest/56216.php

Midge Miller of Madison is a former Wisconsin state legislator who
played a critical role in organizing the insurgent anti-war
presidential campaign of former U.S. Sen. Eugene McCarthy in 1968. She
has been active in every presidential campaign since then.

=====================

[Sarah]

Are you really that comfortable with a candidate so many Republicans
are happy with?

http://www.greaterdemocracy.org/2003_08_01_gd.html#106203463665230544

A candidate who is constantly shifting positions to gain votes?

Are you going to be happy with big money owning our country forever?

This is the absolute best opportunity we have EVER had to "take our
country back" from the system of corporate feudalism it has become and
I am going to fight like hell, on behalf of my grandkids to do just
that.

I simply can not imagine how any true progressive or liberal Democrat
could turn their back on this opportunity. Vote for who you want
after the primaries, but for God's sake work for the best change
possible up until then.

=======================

"Give me a presidential candidate who speaks the truth as he sees it,
and I'll show you a candidate whose campaign, win or lose, will be
good for the nation." - George McGovern

================================

Post by Douglas Otis
Dear Sarah,
Remember Bush has used his influence to raise a substantial campaign
fund and is also good at using scare tactics. Although I like many of
the ideas of Dennis, I think some of his ideas are too revolutionary
rather than evolutionary. For this reason, I feel Howard Dean has a
better chance as it provides less fuel to the well funded fear

monger.

Post by Douglas Otis
Perhaps it could be VP Kucinich?
Doug

Post by Sarah
From: "briank20032003" <snip>
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 3:11 PM
Subject: [USDemocrat2] Kucinich most likely to beat Bush
There are those people in the Democratic Party whose primary

concern

Post by Douglas Otis

Post by Sarah
is choosing the nominee that is most likely to beat George Bush. I've
heard these people referred to as "Anybody But Bush Again" people or
(ABBAs). They are concerned about getting the votes in the

"center"

Post by Douglas Otis

Post by Sarah
of the political spectrum.
So I ask, how many of the people who would choose John Kerry, Howard
Dean, or Dick Gephardt over George Bush, would in a race between
Dennis Kucinich and George Bush choose Bush? I suggest very, very
few. This "center" that ABBAs worry about is imaginary, it's hollow.
What ABBAs should realize is that they, themselves, are the true
"center," and by their own admission, they'll choose ANY Democrat over
Bush. So this election will not be won by Democrats by choosing a
nominee that is least different from Bush in order to appeal to an
imaginary "center," but by choosing a nominee that appeals to the
"left." The left out that is.
There are tens of millions of people in this country who don't vote.
They don't vote because they don't think it makes a difference. The
way you get their vote is by producing as nominee the candidate that
is MOST different from Bush. On jobs, healthcare, education,

energy,

Post by Douglas Otis

Post by Sarah
foreign policy, campaign finance reform, the environment, and reducing
the Pentagon budget, that candidate is Dennis Kucinich.
Furthermore, if ABBAs dislike Bush so much, I would think on
principles they would be most in agreement with Kucinich.
Also, Kucinich is 3-0 running against Republican incumbents. He
defeated a Republican incumbent when he was elected Mayor of
Cleveland, when he won a seat in the Ohio State Senate, and when he
was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives. He is able to garner
support from Reagan Democrats and moderate Republicans at the same
time that he appeals to traditional Democrats, Ralph Nader

supporters,

Post by Douglas Otis

Post by Sarah
and independents. That's why he got 74 percent of the vote in his
last re-election.
Another important factor to consider is that Kucinich comes from the
swing-state of Ohio which will have 20 electoral votes in the 2004
election. Republicans have never won the Presidency without

winning

Post by Douglas Otis

Post by Sarah
Ohio. With Kucinich as nominee, Bush will not win Ohio. By
comparison, Howard Dean's home state of Vermont only has 3

electoral

Post by Douglas Otis

Post by Sarah
votes.
Al Gore lost the 2000 election because he tried to appeal to the
imaginary, hollow "center," rather than the needs of the tens of
millions of hard-working Americans who are disenchanted with the
political process. Let us, as Democrats, not make that mistake again.
The best chance Democrats have of taking back the White House in 2004
is to nominate Dennis Kucinich, the candidate who advocates a full
employment economy. His administration will create public works jobs
rebuilding America's schools, roads, bridges, water systems, sewer
systems, and communication and energy infrastructures. Kucinich is
the candidate who will withdraw from NAFTA and the WTO and instead
protect American jobs, workers' rights, human rights, and the
environment with fair bilateral trade agreements. A Kucinich
administration will support and promote family farmers rather than
corporate agribusiness. And Kucinich will roll the Social Security
retirement age back to 65.
The Kucinich healthcare plan is the one that guarantees to provide
total healthcare for all from cradle to grave with no premiums, no
deductibles, and no co-pays (and no multi-million dollar salaries for
insurance company CEOs). Dennis Kucinich will repeal the part of
Bush's tax cuts that went to the rich. A Kucinich White House will
provide pre-K for all three, four, and five-year olds, as well as free
{note-this is not a positive yet - they are still crunching the
numbers} tuition for America's young people at public colleges and
universities.
Dennis Kucinich will support solar, wind, hydrogen, bio-mass, and
other renewable and environmentally-friendly energy sources that will
make America less dependent on foreign oil. He will have a foreign
policy based on friendly cooperation and respect for the

international

Post by Douglas Otis

Post by Sarah
rule of law, rather than one based on fear, lies, and unwarranted
aggression.
The Kucinich campaign practices public financing and takes no
corporate donations. Kucinich will force the FCC to demand that media
networks provide free TV time to national candidates. This is real
campaign finance reform that will eliminate the need for

candidates to

Post by Douglas Otis

Post by Sarah
accept corporate money in order to raise the big-bucks currently
needed to get on TV.
And most importantly, Kucinich will reduce the currently unaudited
Pentagon budget by fifteen percent by eliminating wasteful

projects

Post by Douglas Otis

Post by Sarah
that aren't needed and don't work anyway. The Pentagon can't

account

Post by Douglas Otis

Post by Sarah
for over one-TRILLION dollars of spent, or more accurately,

misspent,

Post by Douglas Otis

Post by Sarah
taxpayer money. Now that's an outrage. What's even more

outrageous is

Post by Douglas Otis

Post by Sarah
that there are other Democratic candidates, such as Dean, that won't
touch the Pentagon budget. Dennis Kucinich, on the other hand, sees
the waste, and as our next President will put an end to it.
As Dennis Kucinich says, "It's not about the (political) labels. It's
about, 'What do the people need?'" And Dennis Kucinich is in tune
with what the people need, and that is why Dennis Kucinich is the most
electable Democratic candidate for President

[Douglas Otis]

Post by Sarah
Are you really that comfortable with a candidate so many Republicans
are happy with?
http://www.greaterdemocracy.org/2003_08_01_gd.html#106203463665230544

This article praises Howard Dean? That is bad?
|
| I have campaigned all over this country and I have enormous confidence in the
| basic common sense of the American people. I believe if you speak to them
| rationally they will listen. I am convinced that one of the reasons that the Dean
| campaign is gaining such traction is because unlike everyone else they have
| thrown the rule book away and are beginning to intelligently address the
| problems that are threatening the nation.

Post by Sarah
A candidate who is constantly shifting positions to gain votes?

As with any attempt to communicate with a large population, some
things can be said in a better manner as not to be misunderstood.
Even if there were a shift in position, I think these changes deserve
consideration and not immediately labeled a weakness. Don't buy into
sound bites as having great meaning.

Post by Sarah
Are you going to be happy with big money owning our country forever?

Any candidate will need money to be successful. I would like to see
this change, but rules for this election will not allow this ideal.

Post by Sarah
This is the absolute best opportunity we have EVER had to "take our
country back" from the system of corporate feudalism it has become and
I am going to fight like hell, on behalf of my grandkids to do just
that.

Fine. But if you wish to support your candidate, then try to do so in
a positive manner.

Post by Sarah
I simply can not imagine how any true progressive or liberal Democrat
could turn their back on this opportunity. Vote for who you want
after the primaries, but for God's sake work for the best change
possible up until then.

It is not my opportunity, it is the candidate's.

Post by Sarah
=======================
"Give me a presidential candidate who speaks the truth as he sees it,
and I'll show you a candidate whose campaign, win or lose, will be
good for the nation." - George McGovern
================================

You are entitled to believe Kucinich is able to deliver this nation
from the wrath of the Bush administration. It also requires an
ability to inspire confidence in both voters and supporters. I have
indicated my concerns of which you failed to address. Instead you
have made unsubstantiated attacks against an alternative democratic
opponent. I assure you, for this reason Leiberman will not be
considered. Above all else-- not Bush and not needless war.

I have been to Israel and I am not happy with the brutal way they have
been handling their problems. I would say the same about Bush and
Iraq. 30,000 dead in Iraq and hundreds in Israel will not bring any
resolution or peace. This is not making the world a safer place.
Perhaps the US should have provided a better example as well as
offered more support to both leaders to allow possibilities of peace.
We are falling backing into a feudal system instead.

Doug

Post by Sarah

Post by Douglas Otis
Dear Sarah,
Remember Bush has used his influence to raise a substantial campaign
fund and is also good at using scare tactics. Although I like many of
the ideas of Dennis, I think some of his ideas are too revolutionary
rather than evolutionary. For this reason, I feel Howard Dean has a
better chance as it provides less fuel to the well funded fear monger.
Perhaps it could be VP Kucinich?
Doug

<snip>

[Bert Bishop]

Post by Sarah
Are you really that comfortable with a candidate so many Republicans
are happy with?
http://www.greaterdemocracy.org/2003_08_01_gd.html#106203463665230544
A candidate who is constantly shifting positions to gain votes?
Are you going to be happy with big money owning our country forever?
This is the absolute best opportunity we have EVER had to "take our
country back" from the system of corporate feudalism it has become and
I am going to fight like hell, on behalf of my grandkids to do just
that.
I simply can not imagine how any true progressive or liberal Democrat
could turn their back on this opportunity. Vote for who you want
after the primaries, but for God's sake work for the best change
possible up until then.

I feel Sarah has it backwards. It should be "vote for who you want in
the primaries, but for God's sake work to eliminate the incompetent
anti-American incumbent in the general election."

Post by Sarah
=======================
"Give me a presidential candidate who speaks the truth as he sees it,
and I'll show you a candidate whose campaign, win or lose, will be
good for the nation." - George McGovern
================================