Dennis Kucinich != Presidential

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2003-08-22 12:31pm

I saw Kucinich on the Daily Show last night.

He's a nice guy, I wouldn't mind him as SecEnergy or SecInt, but he just doesn't have the aura of leadership that a president needs. He's too short and too skinny, and his voice just doesn't project Presidential authority. And he spent a lot of the interview subtly weaving Jon Stewart away from issues like taxation (probably didn't want to admit that he wants not just to repeal the 2003 tax cut package but actually raise taxes).

So good secretary, lousy president.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-08-22 12:40pm

He could also sponsor a bill to give everyone aluminum foil helmets to block out the government's mind control rays.

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2003-08-22 12:45pm

How about we just support
AL SHARPTON?

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2003-08-22 12:46pm

Sharpton's campaign is broke. He's a nonissue.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-08-22 12:46pm

MKSheppard wrote:How about we just support
AL SHARPTON?

He would be the Republican dream candidate.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2003-08-22 01:25pm

Iceberg wrote:I saw Kucinich on the Daily Show last night.

He's a nice guy, I wouldn't mind him as SecEnergy or SecInt, but he just doesn't have the aura of leadership that a president needs. He's too short and too skinny, and his voice just doesn't project Presidential authority. And he spent a lot of the interview subtly weaving Jon Stewart away from issues like taxation (probably didn't want to admit that he wants not just to repeal the 2003 tax cut package but actually raise taxes).

Did anyone ask him on MiniPax? :p

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2003-08-22 01:32pm

phongn wrote:
Iceberg wrote:I saw Kucinich on the Daily Show last night.

He's a nice guy, I wouldn't mind him as SecEnergy or SecInt, but he just doesn't have the aura of leadership that a president needs. He's too short and too skinny, and his voice just doesn't project Presidential authority. And he spent a lot of the interview subtly weaving Jon Stewart away from issues like taxation (probably didn't want to admit that he wants not just to repeal the 2003 tax cut package but actually raise taxes).
Did anyone ask him on MiniPax? :p

Nope.

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2003-08-22 03:00pm

Iceberg wrote:Sharpton's campaign is broke. He's a nonissue.

not to mention the fact that the DNC pushed Carol Moseley-Braun to tun solely to suck money and votes away from Al Sharpton....hmmmm which party is keepin' the black man down?

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2003-08-22 03:21pm

If you had Al Sharpton on your side, wouldn't you want to keep him as far out of the race as possible?

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2003-08-22 03:42pm

Iceberg wrote:If you had Al Sharpton on your side, wouldn't you want to keep him as far out of the race as possible?

Who did Clinton pick as his Sec State and NSA Advisor?

A old white bimbo and a white guy.

Who has Bush picked for SecState and NSA Advisor?

Black guy and black woman.

Gee, which party is keeping the black man down now

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2003-08-22 03:53pm

At this point in the election cycle, you have three tiers of Democratic candidates - the front-runners, the idea men and the also-rans.

Front-runners are, obviously, the guys who have the real shot at a nomination. This year, those are Howard Dean, John Kerry, Bob Graham and John Edwards.

The idea men are the ones who don't really have a shot at the Oval Office, but have a lot of ideas (some good and some bad) that might eventually make it into the platform of one of the front-runners. This year, these are Kucinich and - much as it pains me to admit it - Sharpton. Some idea men may have a chance at the Oval Office at a later date, others will never have a shot, but their energy keeps them out of the last category.

The also-rans are the ones who not only don't have much of a shot at the election, they don't really have much to offer the party in the way of ideas, either. These are the ones who are either running just to be running (Carol Moseley-Braun) or think that if they stick their hat in the ring enough times, they'll get something out of it (Lieberman, Gephardt).

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2003-08-22 04:01pm

Col. Crackpot wrote:
Iceberg wrote:Sharpton's campaign is broke. He's a nonissue.
not to mention the fact that the DNC pushed Carol Moseley-Braun to tun solely to suck money and votes away from Al Sharpton....hmmmm which party is keepin' the black man down?

More likely trying to keep an embarrasing crackpot down. Sharpton has no real credibility outside the disgruntled minority vote and his brand of racist PC would alienate most of the Democratic party, let alone most of the voting public.

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2003-08-22 04:16pm

Sharpton's contribution is that he brings the disgruntled minority vote into the Democratic Party effectively.

If he didn't do that, he would have no value whatsoever to the Democrats.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2003-08-22 08:04pm

Iceberg wrote:At this point in the election cycle, you have three tiers of Democratic candidates - the front-runners, the idea men and the also-rans.

Front-runners are, obviously, the guys who have the real shot at a nomination. This year, those are Howard Dean, John Kerry, Bob Graham and John Edwards.

The Man with the Notepad doesn't have enough exposure to get a shot, I think.

Post by **Alyrium Denryle** » 2003-08-22 09:34pm

I hope Kucinich does make some position. I like him. Nice guy, very articulate, and he has some good ideas so far as energy is concerned. But it is true, he just doesnt have the aura of eadership...

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2003-08-25 04:29pm

if we absoulutely had to have a Democrat, i would go with Dick Gephardt. I like they guy. reasonable, well spoken, moderate, tough when needed. i wouldn't count him out.

Hamel · Post by **Hamel** » 2003-08-25 04:38pm

Lyndon LaRouche for pres in 2004!!!!

EmperorSolo51 · Post by **EmperorSolo51** » 2003-08-25 04:40pm

Col. Crackpot wrote:if we absoulutely had to have a Democrat, i would go with Dick Gephardt. I like they guy. reasonable, well spoken, moderate, tough when needed. i wouldn't count him out.

Yeah, but he also said in a town hall forum a few months back that he would issue an executive order to overturn any Supreme court descision he doesn't like.

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2003-08-25 04:57pm

Col. Crackpot wrote:if we absoulutely had to have a Democrat, i would go with Dick Gephardt. I like they guy. reasonable, well spoken, moderate, tough when needed. i wouldn't count him out.

Gephardt's poll numbers have fallen steadily behind, almost as badly as have Lieberman's (he's also fairly unpopular in his home state outside of his home district). Unless one of them pulls a fairly major PR makeover, they're both going to be nonissues post-New Hampshire (if not post-Iowa).

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Dennis Kucinich != Presidential

Dennis Kucinich != Presidential

Re: Dennis Kucinich != Presidential

Re: Dennis Kucinich != Presidential