Ohio 2012 Congressional Races

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

I don't see why people like Kucinich.

He looks like the Democrat version of Trump (i.e. a troll).

I think Kucinich is actually extremely unpopular among most Democrats (including liberals) and especially among Ohio Democrats. 

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

I don't see why people like Kucinich.

He looks like the Democrat version of Trump (i.e. a troll).

I think Kucinich is actually extremely unpopular among most Democrats (including liberals) and especially among Ohio Democrats. 

I don't understand why Democrats are so obsessed with compromising on their values that they need to vote out Kucinich.

Kucinich doesn't represent Democratic values, he represents Dennis Kucinich and that's about it, also he has the Alan Grayson problem (he's an attention-craving demagogue who tea-partiers can use for false equivalency whenever someone calls out Bachmann, King, Broun, etc on their extremism).  Plus, in all honesty, Kaptur can do far more for the district (even if one removes Norm Dicks retirement from the equation) than Kucinich ever will be able to (ideology isn't the only thing that matters). 

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

If Kucinich loses to Kaptur, can he still run for one of Washington's open congressional seats?

He will.

And fortunately he will get destroyed should he attempt to run in Washington. 

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

But Kaptur is just another member of the establishment, it seems.  Kucinich is much better at representing the Progressive movement as a whole and, unlike Kaptur, is willing to stand against his own party leadership when those values are compromised.  As for working with the other side, he's done plenty of work with Ron Paul.  But if the Democrats want their party to have any legitimacy at all, it needs to nominate less Marcy Kapturs' and more Dennis Kucinichs' and Alan Graysons'.  The Republicans nominate theirs all the time.

Hell, if Kaptur wins the primary, I'll just support the Green Party candidate.  Kucinich can carry out the rest of his work in WA.

Except that he doesn't represent the progressive movement well, if anything he hurts and discredits it.  The progressive/liberal-wing of the democratic party is/has been best represented by people like Russ Feingold, Sherrod Brown, Tom Perriello, Paul Wellstone, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, etc.  People like Kucinich and Alan Grayson are self-promoting demagogues who increase polarization, demonize anyone who disagrees with them (rather than acknowledging that good people sometimes disagree on political issues), and alienate voters.  If the Democratic party ever becomes a party of Alan Grayson-types than I would want no part in it.  Additionally, saying "I'm going to be so ideologically puritanical that the candidates I support will never be in a position to actually do anything" is taking the easy way out.  It's like saying "society is so beneath my moral standards that I am not going to participate in it in a meaningful way."  Although this allows one to feel superior, it doesn't fix anything, in fact all it really does is ensure that there will be one less person trying to change society or policy for the better.   

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

But Kaptur is just another member of the establishment, it seems.  Kucinich is much better at representing the Progressive movement as a whole and, unlike Kaptur, is willing to stand against his own party leadership when those values are compromised.  As for working with the other side, he's done plenty of work with Ron Paul.  But if the Democrats want their party to have any legitimacy at all, it needs to nominate less Marcy Kapturs' and more Dennis Kucinichs' and Alan Graysons'.  The Republicans nominate theirs all the time.

Hell, if Kaptur wins the primary, I'll just support the Green Party candidate.  Kucinich can carry out the rest of his work in WA.

Except that he doesn't represent the progressive movement well, if anything he hurts and discredits it.  The progressive/liberal-wing of the democratic party is/has been best represented by people like Russ Feingold, Sherrod Brown, Tom Perriello, Paul Wellstone, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, etc.  People like Kucinich and Alan Grayson are self-promoting demagogues who increase polarization, demonize anyone who disagrees with them (rather than acknowledging that good people sometimes disagree on political issues), and alienate voters.  If the Democratic party ever becomes a party of Alan Grayson-types than I would want no part in it.  Additionally, saying "I'm going to be so ideologically puritanical that the candidates I support will never be in a position to actually do anything" is taking the easy way out.  It's like saying "society is so beneath my moral standards that I am not going to participate in it in a meaningful way."  Although this allows one to feel superior, it doesn't fix anything, in fact all it really does is ensure that there will be one less person trying to change society or policy for the better.  

Kucinich and Grayson only add to that group.  Increasing polarization?  Demonizing their opponents?  Have you seen the Republican primaries this year?  If the party does change in the way that they both want it to, that will only be for the better.  The modern Progressive movement, as far as I've seen, has become nothing but another pro-establishment movement.  That's what weakens the base.  If we lose the spine of the progressive wing, the Democratic Party as a whole will only look weaker.  We already lost one of those heroes in the last midterm.

 

Yes, I have seen the Republican primaries and the tea-party movement, that's the whole point.  I don't want the Democratic party to become that.  Grayson and Kucinich would not add to the group I mentioned, they would only discredit it.  There is a difference between having a spine and being a self-promoting demagogue.  Also, saying that because the Republicans have been hijacked by their most extreme factions, the Democrats should allow the same thing to happen to them is the political equivalent of "it's not my fault, they started it," hardly a valid justification for doing something.  Additionally, ideology isn't all that matters to voters, and objectively speaking, Kucinich will never be able to do anywhere near as much for Ohio as Kaptur due to the simple fact that he is (rightfully) a pariah in the eyes of most Democrats (including most liberals), Democratic politicians and rank-and-file voters can't stand the man.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

It would be great if he ran in WA-1 b/c he has no chance of making it to the runoff and he'll only take money and support from the weakest Democrat in the race (Darcy Brunner).