Booman Tribune ~ A Progressive Community

Kucinich Excluded from Iowa Debate

by BooMan
Wed Dec 12th, 2007 at 12:09:05 PM EST

People can and will debate whether the Iowa caucus system is a good or legitimate method of determining our presidential nominees. And people can and will disagree about what it means to be a political activist. But I think you can say that anyone that goes out in the cold at 7pm on a worknight to spend three hours debating the fate of the free world is at least minimally 'active' in politics. Add to this that Iowa's Democratic electorate is famously anti-war, and you've got the perfect constituency for Dennis Kucinich. If Dennis Kucinich is going to do well anywhere, he's going to do well among anti-war political activists that pay more than average attention to politics. Compare that electorate to New Hampshire, where independents and other low information voters are allowed to vote in the Democratic primary.

So, it's understandable that the Kucinich campaign is angry that they have been excluded from Thursday's Des Moines Register debate.

Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D) is being excluded from this week’s Iowa presidential debate because he has not rented office space in the Hawkeye State, his campaign said Wednesday.
The Des Moines Register informed the campaign that Kucinich is not invited because the newspaper determined “that a person working out of his home did not meet our criteria for a campaign office and full-time paid staff in Iowa,” the campaign said...
...“The Iowa caucuses have been portrayed as having national implications, and if the Register has decided to use hair-splitting technicalities to exclude the leading voice of the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party, then the entire process is suspect,” the campaign said in a statement about the “arbitrary and unreasonable exclusion.”

Now, before you go getting all indignant, keep in mind that this is Kucinich's own fault. Iowa is a state where he might expect to do well. It's certainly more favorable to him than New Hampshire, South Carolina, or Florida. If he can't even open an office in Iowa then his campaign is not serious. He basically is pretending to run for president for the specific purpose of having a voice in the debates.

There has to be some logical criteria for excluding some people from debates, and evidence of office space is better than position in the polls.

This is emblematic of my problem with Kucinich in general. He is saying many things I agree with, including on health care and impeachment. But I would much rather some other candidate would make those arguments...maybe a candidate with a headquarters in Iowa. And, I don't think this is a new or unannounced policy by the Des Moines Register. So Kucinich knew, or should have known, that the price of being in this debate was the price of office space in the state of Iowa.

If you have been supporting Kucinich because of his positions on the issues, I suggest you take a look at some other candidate that is at least saying some of the right things...like Chris Dodd, for example. Dodd has enough respect for the process and for Iowans that he is practically living in the state and has plenty of office space.

Kucinich Excluded from Iowa Debate | 25 comments (25 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

So what you are suggesting (none / 1)

What you are suggesting is that there is a financial test for running for office. If you can't afford to rent an office, you are not a serious candidate.

50 states, 210 media market, 435 Congressional Districts, 3080 counties, 192,480 precincts

by TarheelDem on Wed Dec 12th, 2007 at 12:35:57 PM EST

Re: So what you are suggesting (none / 1)

Yes. I am definitely suggesting that. Otherwise, you could 100's of people clamoring to be included in debates. If you can't show you are making a good faith effort to compete outside of the free media provided by a debate appearance, then you aren't a serious candidate.

We are a party and we elect a champion to represent our values. And we'd be insane to support someone that can't even gather enough support to open an office.

But, let's be serious. Kucinich could afford an office, he just didn't want to pay for one because he isn't serious, and he just wants to have a voice in the national debate. By thay logic, I could be on the stage if I gathered enough signatures to be on the ballot.

by BooMan on Wed Dec 12th, 2007 at 12:44:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So what you are suggesting (none / 1)

By thay logic, I could be on the stage if I gathered enough signatures to be on the ballot.

Something to think about for 2012. Let's start laying the infrastructure now, and start looking for cheap office space in Iowa.

Tengo un sueño.

by ejmw (ewitham (at) umich (dot) edu) on Wed Dec 12th, 2007 at 12:48:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So what you are suggesting (none / 0)

By thay logic, I could be on the stage if I gathered enough signatures to be on the ballot.

I think that was what Stephen Colbert was going for with his presidential bid.

Anyway, Kucinich is going to have to defend his congressional seat here in Ohio now - in the primary no less. Some of his constituents - even folks who generally like him as a Rep - are getting ticked off at his quixotic presidential runs and want him to stop. I think that's a direct result of the "unseriousness" of his runs.

He clearly isn't actually trying to get the presidential bid, and it looks like he's trying to put issues out there to make the other candidates respond to them. I think that would normally be a very useful thing - since the media is completely lazy/corrupt (take your pick) and will only ask candidates tough questions if one of the other candidates brings it up first.

The problem is that Kucinich, by not taking the process seriously, has undermined his own ability to get these tough questions out into the campaign. The reporters are able to point out areas where he isn't serious and use that as a justification for both not taking him seriously as a candidate or worse taking his stances and portraying them as the "crazy fringe" of political thought instead of something more mainstream.

by nonynony on Wed Dec 12th, 2007 at 02:31:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

exactly (none / 0)

he's a sitting senator, for crying in the sink! if he can't afford to rent a small office somewhere and man it with a temp receptionist (when he knew, or should have known, the qualifications for getting into the debate) than it's on his own head.

i'm a fan of dennis the menace, but if he's not going to approach this like he wants be in the process, then he can't come crying when he's left out of it.

by skippybkroo (skippybkroo@aol.com) on Wed Dec 12th, 2007 at 06:12:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Kucinich is a senator? (none / 0)

News to me. I'll bet it'd be news to him, too.

I for one welcome our new Twitter overlords. @Omir55

by Omir the Storyteller (omir.the.storyteller -CAT- gmail -DOG- com) on Wed Dec 12th, 2007 at 06:24:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: exactly (none / 0)

he's a sitting representative.

by BooMan on Wed Dec 12th, 2007 at 06:26:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So what you are suggesting (none / 0)

Want more evidence that Kucinich isn't serious?

Alan Keyes qualified.

JOHNSTON, IA -- There is one additional Republican presidential candidate who will be on the stage here at the GOP Des Moines Register/Iowa Public Television debate this afternoon: Alan Keyes.
This will be the first major debate this cycle featuring the former presidential candidate and ambassador, who most recently faced off against Barack Obama in the 2004 Illinois Senate race (even though he actually hails from Maryland). Keyes did participate in the Tavis Smiley-moderated GOP debate in September, which the top Republican candidates skipped.
Why is Keyes debating, while Kucinich and Gravel are not at tomorrow's Democratic debate? According to Iowa Public Television spokeswoman Jennifer Glover Konfrst, Keyes met the criteria to participate; Kucinich and Gravel did not.
The criteria include: 1) an FEC statement of candidacy; 2) having an Iowa campaign staffer and Iowa campaign office as of October 1; and 3) registering at least at 1% in the October Des Moines Register poll.

by BooMan on Wed Dec 12th, 2007 at 12:48:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Kucinich Excluded from Iowa Debate (none / 1)

That's quite a leap of logic to go from no office space in Iowa to Kucinich is not serious about being President. I just don't follow it. Since Guiliani is "skipping" Iowa is he not serious about being President either?

There could be a very simple explanation for not renting office space. Maybe they thought spending money on rent when they could use someone's house rent free was wasting money. I don't know and you don't know either. You are right that Kucinich only has himself to blame though. For whatever reason, it was a mistake. I would like to know the whole story behind it.

But really, every candidate below 10% must realize he or she has a very slim chance of becoming President. Out of all the candidates it is a little telling that you pick Kucinich to call out as the one candidate that's in it for personal aggrandizement and not the right reasons. Every candidate running for President has a big head and most know that he don't have a shot of making it. Is Dodd really in it for the right reasons and Kucinich such a fraud that a progressive must switch his vote to Dodd right now? Or is it time to get behind Hillary yet? Is Hillary running for the right reasons?

If this is the best you could do to expose Kucinich as a fraud you better keep on trying.

by SFHawkguy on Wed Dec 12th, 2007 at 02:52:36 PM EST

Re: Kucinich Excluded from Iowa Debate (none / 0)

Even Alan Keyes has his shit together enough to qualify for the debate. How can use possibly argue that Kucinich is serious?

by BooMan on Wed Dec 12th, 2007 at 02:54:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Kucinich Excluded from Iowa Debate (none / 1)

Kucinich has made an effort. I don't follow campaigns enough to know all the gritty details, but Kucinich seems to be more engaged and active than say, Fred Thompson, Rudy Guiliani, and even someone like Dodd. I guess we would have to start comparing campaign event stops, voting records while campaigning, and other measures of time to truly compare.

Look, I don't blindly support Kucinich. His organizational skills may be lacking. Hell, if I was voting on organizational skills and tireless work ethic I would probably vote for Hillary. You raise a good point that Kucinich failed to get his shit together in Iowa. I'm open to you pointing that out.

But, you also said, "this is emblematic of my problem with Kucinich in general. He is saying many things I agree with, including on health care and impeachment. But I would much rather some other candidate would make those arguments...maybe a candidate with a headquarters in Iowa. "

You do see the problem here . . . right? Kucinich is the only candidate that is saying things you agree with on impeachment. So yeah, I guess if you think not having you shit all together to fulfill some technical requirement for the Des Moines Register debate than go ahead and throw the issues out the window. Did I mention Hillary is a great organizer? I bet she has a beautiful office in the hip area of downtown Des Moines (http://travel.nytimes.com/2007/12/02/travel/02journeys.html?ref=travel) and has all her ducks in a row on the Des Moines Register rules. In fact, I bet she has networked with Register people and throws out names like Jim Hoagland, Geneva Overhaulser, and David Yepsen. I'm sure she's down with this crowd in a way that Kucinich isn't.

by SFHawkguy on Wed Dec 12th, 2007 at 03:20:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Kucinich Excluded from Iowa Debate (none / 1)

this gets to the heart of it.

Would you hire a lawyer to represent you that couldn't remember to file papers with the court, anticipate judge instructions, or arrive in court on time?

Would it matter how great he or she was with the jury?

Kucinich is a farce, which I have known since the last election cycle. This debate fiasco should make his supporters furious, but not at the Register. Need I repeat, Alan Keyes met the minimum requirements. Did you even know he was running again? I didn't.

by BooMan on Wed Dec 12th, 2007 at 03:38:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Kucinich Excluded from Iowa Debate (none / 0)

I just don't follow this logic that his failure to comply with all the rules of the Des Moines Register debate rises to the level of professional incompetence. Other campaigns have made more serious mistakes. Obama attacking Krugman or questioning social security come to mind. In fact, all the major Democrat candidates have committed far more serious crimes of political malpractice throughout the last 7 years. I would much rather have a President that "got it right the first time", like Dennis Kucinich did on issues such as Iraq and our civil liberties than have a candidate that gets all the major issues wrong but has an awesome campaign advance team. Kucinich exhibited far better political judgment the last few years than Hillary did, for instance. To me, how one voted on Iraq is a much better test of Presidential meddle than a campaign's ability to follow the technical requirements of the Des Moines Register debate.

by SFHawkguy on Wed Dec 12th, 2007 at 03:53:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Kucinich Excluded from Iowa Debate (none / 1)

"How can use possibly argue that Kucinich is serious"

You've been in Philly waaaaay too long, Boo.

Declaring the bottom is the only way back up..

by anarchronarchist (mincers (-at-) hotmail (-dot-) com) on Wed Dec 12th, 2007 at 03:39:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Kucinich Excluded from Iowa Debate (none / 1)

"Serious" is just another meaningless bullshit word spread by the self-appointed pundits. Apparently even around here, there's something wrong with a "fringe" candidate being there to stir things up and bring some core issues to a phony debate about gotchas and style instead of substance. Kucinich irritates the pundits because he keeps trying to derail their domination over how the election is packaged. He's anathema equally to the right and the pseudo-liberals. I think that's what this is all about.

Apparently Kucinich's staff assumed that a home office met the requirements. Their bad. Should that really matter? I don't think so, given the quality of the debates in general.

The argument that just anybody could be in the debates is amazingly specious. Kucinich is on the ballot in enough states to theoretically win the nomination. That should be sufficient. If that means "100s" of candidates would be in the debate, so be it. But it doesn't mean that.

It's time to either see this as the petty crap that it is or quit complaining that the "debates" are little more than white noise. This country is down the toilet. Kucinich is one of a small minority of pols and their courtiers who is not directly responsible for putting us there. I guess he's just not serious enough.

FDR's response to progressive demands: "I agree. Now go out and make me do it."

by DaveW on Wed Dec 12th, 2007 at 02:57:12 PM EST

Re: presidential opportunity (none / 1)

This could be a 'presidential' moment for the likes of the forerunners to step in and ask that he be allowed to participate...on the grounds that they're all about democracy in action. Just sayin' certainly Hillary or Obama or Edwards might gain rather than lose from standing up for the underdog here. Yes he borrows from their time to crow but it's also one of those moments to make presidential hay out of.

by mainsailset on Wed Dec 12th, 2007 at 03:21:16 PM EST

GREAT!!!! (none / 0)

It's about time. Kucinich is a loon. A genuwine crank. His time is past, if it ever was. If he were to obtain the nomination, it would be McGovern redux, and we DO NOT want that.

Gravel is another wack job.

Neither of these guys has any chance AT ALL of getting the nomination. Even Dodd, lowest of the rest (and my personal fav), is much more likely.

by dataguy on Wed Dec 12th, 2007 at 03:33:37 PM EST

Re: GREAT!!!! (none / 0)

Please describe lunacy?

Declaring the bottom is the only way back up..

by anarchronarchist (mincers (-at-) hotmail (-dot-) com) on Wed Dec 12th, 2007 at 03:38:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Flying saucers? (none / 0)

Progressives who are anti-choice? Card-carrying members of the Chipmunks Union?

Kucinich is unelectable.

by dataguy on Thu Dec 13th, 2007 at 12:21:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Flying saucers? (none / 0)

But insane?

Declaring the bottom is the only way back up..

by anarchronarchist (mincers (-at-) hotmail (-dot-) com) on Thu Dec 13th, 2007 at 12:35:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Kucinich Excluded from Iowa Debate (none / 0)

I wonder what our first umpteen presidents who rarely showed their faces ANYWHERE during campaigns would say about this?

Declaring the bottom is the only way back up..

by anarchronarchist (mincers (-at-) hotmail (-dot-) com) on Wed Dec 12th, 2007 at 03:37:48 PM EST

Re: Kucinich Excluded from Iowa Debate (none / 0)

i guess impeachment isn't serious, either?

by liberaljournal on Wed Dec 12th, 2007 at 06:19:57 PM EST

Kucinich - no! Dodd - Yes! (none / 0)

Dodd is a great guy, with sensible positions, tons of experience, and one tragic flaw that will keep him forever in the Senate:

He can speak only sentences with 3 subordinate clauses.

by dataguy on Thu Dec 13th, 2007 at 12:25:03 AM EST

Re: Kucinich Excluded from Iowa Debate (none / 0)

well after watching keyes orate at the pug debate yesterday, i found myself wishing for kucinich...

it sucks dennis didn't qualify, cuz his platforms make more sense than the bizniz as usual proffered by the other dem candidates.

keyes, in his retro-preacher style, showed up the cheesy common ground between all the other pugs, excepting paul, who is on his own planet...

one was excited by the idea of getting 30-40 million more folks health insurance...the other poor fucks....tough shit...

america has not faced the darkness in its soul yet, or it would be on its knees before a potential political saviour such as DK, elfin ears or not.

his presence at the debate would have been entertaining, as it might have made the others squirm, and maybe even sweat.

romney is straight from central casting, un-effing-real...

extrude-a-pol!

huckabee is loony as a moorhen too, but the others were so awful, it had me begging for his win if the pugs ace it again-

anything after bush is such a vast upgrade...

whoever gets the gig better be superman, or al gore squared...

picking on dennis is unworthy of your talents, boo.

i feel your pain, though.

"Terrorism is the war of the poor, and war is the terrorism of the rich." Peter Ustinov

by melo on Thu Dec 13th, 2007 at 08:06:01 AM EST

Re: Kucinich Excluded from Iowa Debate (none / 0)

well after watching keyes orate at the pug debate yesterday, i found myself wishing for kucinich...

it sucks dennis didn't qualify, cuz his platforms make more sense than the bizniz as usual proffered by the other dem candidates.

keyes, in his retro-preacher style, showed up the cheesy common ground between all the other pugs, excepting paul, who is on his own planet...

one was excited by the idea of getting 30-40 million more folks health insurance...the other poor fucks....tough shit...

america has not faced the darkness in its soul yet, or it would be on its knees before a potential political saviour such as DK, elfin ears or not.

his presence at the debate would have been entertaining, as it might have made the others squirm, and maybe even sweat.

romney is straight from central casting, unreal...

extrude-a-pol!

huckabee is loony as a moorhen too, but the others were so awful, it had me begging for his win if the pugs ace it again-

anything after bush is such a vast upgrade...

whoever gets the gig better be superman, or al gore squared...

picking on dennis is too easy, boo.

i feel your pain, though.

"Terrorism is the war of the poor, and war is the terrorism of the rich." Peter Ustinov

by melo on Thu Dec 13th, 2007 at 08:07:36 AM EST

Kucinich Excluded from Iowa Debate | 25 comments (25 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

Go to: [ Booman Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]

. Home
. About
. Contact
. Advertise
. FAQ
. Search

Username:
Password:

. Make a new account
. Reset password

Gift Cards * New Arrivals

NOTE: Overstock bests Amazon's prices and is "blue."

THE BOOKS WITH "BUZZ":
______________

Senator Edward M. Kennedy tells his extraordinary personal story:

True Compass: A Memoir
by Edward M. Kennedy.

Read Barack Obama's vision for America:

The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream
by Barack Obama

Boran2 and maryb2004 recommend:

The Big Over Easy: A Nursery Crime
by Jasper Fforde

Must-have information for all presidents-and citizens-of the twenty-first century?

Physics for Future Presidents: The Science behind the Headlines
Richard A. Muller

rae recommends:

Dark Ages America: The Final Phase of Empire
by Morris Berman.

On BooMan’s shelf:

Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln
by Doris Kearns Goodwin

This looks interesting:

Adventure Divas
by Holly Morris

Here’s a good one from
Elizabeth Gilbert:

Eat Pray Love
by Elizabeth Gilbert

"Crash" * Best Motion Picture, Academy Awards * Only $11.79 at Overstock * 2006 SAG Winner, Best Ensemble

Check out
Powell's new section:
NEW FAVORITES
Selected new arrivals at 30% off

Recommended by Indianadem and ejmw:
The Conscience of a Liberal
by Paul Wellstone

From northcountry’s bookshelf:

The New Golden Age:
The Coming Revolution Against
Political Corruption and Economic Chaos by Ravi Batra

A novel about contractors in Iraq from the woman that runs The Spy That Billed Me:

Outsourced: A Novel
from RJ Hillhouse.

Great Deals
----- * ^ * -----

Find mystery novels by Nancy Pickard ("Kansas")

Challenging Empire: How People, Governments, and the UN Defy US Power by Phyllis Bennis (interviewed on DN!)

Featured by Keith Olbermann, New (Powell's Sale): Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower by William Blum (whose other books merit serious consideration)

"Explosive" State of War: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration
by James Risen

The book the CIA doesn't want you to read: Jawbreaker: The Attack on Bin Laden and Al Qaeda: A Personal Account by the CIA's Key Field Commander
Larry Johnson's review

BT's all-time best seller:

PERMACULTURE:
A Designers' Manual
$79.95 * Sale: $59.95

Unequal Sisters: A Multicultural Reader in U.S. Women's History (Third Edition)

The Undercover Economist: Exposing Why the Rich Are Rich, the Poor Are Poor And Why You Can Never Buy a Decent Used Car!

The Worst Hard Time: The Untold Story of Those Who Survived the Great American Dust Bowl
by Timothy Egan

Green Press Initiative
----- * ^ * -----

Journalistas: 100 Years of the Best Writing and Reporting by Women Journalists by Eleanor Mills * NYT review

Bury Me Standing: the Gypsies & Their Journey

1491: New Revelations of the Americas before Columbus

Brokeback Mountain
by Annie Proulx
----- * ^ * -----
Check out Powell's
"At The Movies"

Imperial Ambitions: Conversations on the Post-9/11 World by Noam Chomsky (Power & Terror: Post 9-11 Talks)

The Price of Privilege:

How Parental Pressure and
Material Advantage Are Creating a Generation of
Disconnected and Unhappy Kids
by Madeline Levine

Save 35-70% on
name brand clothing,
footwear, and outdoor gear
at SierraTradingPost.com
:

We listened to PEN American Center's "State of Emergency" and found 1940s books by Curzio Malaparte only at Alibris. (Selection (MP3) excerpted from "The Skin.")

Banned Books * Are you a fan of Film Noir, Art House, Documentaries or Hong Kong Action? * Searching for a long-lost children's book or a first printing of Miles Davis' Kind of Blue on vinyl? Find it at Alibris!

:
:

Booman Tribune Homepage
admin@boomantribune.com
powered by Scoop

More blogs about Blogs at Technorati.

Technorati Profile