Go Back to the B3 Home Page
Complaints, compliments, arguments? Email me.
[<< "And now there are two sources for Iraq news!"] [Archive Index] [>>"Procter: 'A Democratic Contract With America'"]
07/01/2003 Archived Entry: "Welch: 'The Fire This Time'"
Welch: 'The Fire This Time'
If you've been a Blah3 reader for any amount of time, you'll remember last year's featured commentary of Daniel Patrick Welch. I just got a link from Danny for a new article where he posits that Dennis Kucinich may be the only Democrat who can win in 2004.
Kucinich may be the only guy who can win this election. Sounds far-fetched, right? What the Brits would call Loony Left delusional thinking. The U.S. press would just ignore the whole thing, naturally, until it's no longer possible. Just plain crazy. But is it? Every finely tuned ear has recorded the spike in interest every time someone has had the guts to speak up about various aspects of the nascent fascism we are confronting. From Gore's early comments breaking the taboo of criticizing Bush to Byrd's articulate blasts, mainstream politicians have received a grateful roar from the rabble with each thrust, the bolder the better. Of course, political parties have never been comfortable with movement politicians, and the Boy Mayor of Cleveland is no exception. But these, of course, are no ordinary times, and along the political spectrum, from Chomsky to, say, Chenoweth, people would be hard pressed to say the old rules will work this time around. Along with positive notes from Chomsky, Studs Terkel, Ben Cohen of Ben and Jerry's, Lynn Woolsey of the Progressive Caucus, and left/liberal websites like Democrats.com and Citizens for Legitimate Government, the Kucinich campaign crossed new threshold when he took second place in the Moveon.org online primary, itself a fascinating exercise in online democracy.
Welch is always recommended reading around here. Pay him a visit.
Replies: 4 people speak up
Gotta disagree there. I don't think Kucinich stands a chance. 1) the image thing. It's a sad thing to say it, but how a candidate looks is a big thing in TV dominated elections. 2) He is a bit... odd. I like alot of his ideas, but there are so many ways that the right can just paint his as a totally loony lefty. 3) His waffling on abortion. He has had a pro-life record until recently.
I'm biased because I'm very much behind Dean, but he is my choice. He is attracting both lefties and moderates, even a few Republicans. WHy? 1) His anti-war stance attracted alot of the left crowd and anyone who thought the invasion was idiotic. 2) He has a spine. He says what he beleives and sticks by it. If he doesn't know something, he says it (like in his MTP appearance). 3) He has a large loyal following already. DId you see Dean raised over $7 million this quarter, likely the top for all Dem candidates? Most of it was in small donations and his average donation yesterday was something like $67 (they raised over $800,000 just yesterday)
While it owuld be GREAT to have someone as far left as Kucinich be a viable candidate, I think we have to look down the road for that. It's going to be a long, slow process to shift the political spectrum back to the left after what the media has done to it.
Posted by Jason @ 07/01/2003 11:25 AM NY
Er, Mr. Blah, I hate to piss on your parade, but haven't you forgetten one, small detail?
Americans prefer their presidents to be tall, handsome, and have full heads of hair (the last item is not as important as one and two). The last time we had a short, unprepossessing president was Truman in the long-ago days when the world was in black-and-white.
Okay, so Nixon wasn't handsome, but he was fairly tall. And I'm not sure how tall Eisenhower was.
Posted by Metropolitan99 @ 07/01/2003 12:39 PM NY
Sorry, Jason, I posted my comment before I read yours, but I think we're both on the same wave length: looks are critical.
I forgot to mention this trait: slender. EVERY president since Carter was tall, handsome, slender, and had a full head of hair.
I also agree with you that Dean seems the strongest candidate at this point.
Posted by Metropolitan99 @ 07/01/2003 12:50 PM NY
In truth, I share many of the concerns about Kucinich - and I have to admit to a bias toward other candidates who have declared(Dean and Kerry for different reasons) or have yet to declare (Clark, for another entirely different set of reasons).
I offered Welch's commentary in that I found it to be an interesting perspective, not as a Kucinich endorsement. I'll wait a while before I place my bets - still studying the racing form at this point.
Posted by editor @ 07/01/2003 01:08 PM NY
