AFL-CIO Debate

7:46 pm EST August 8th, 2007 | News | 6 Comments

I think, seriously, that Dennis Kucinich won the debate. He had the advantage of being a “nothing to lose” candidate in front of a crowd that was highly receptive to his message (unabashedly anti-free trade) without having crazy-ass possibly anti-semitic Mike Gravel to dampen his volume. He had the line of the night on trade relations with China:

And I want to say, you know, there was a myth when I was growing up in Cleveland that if you dig a hole deep enough, you’ll get to China. We’re there.

No chance in hell of winning anything real, but he won the debate.

Topic:

Related Posts

«
»

6 Responses to “AFL-CIO Debate”

  1. Thad says:
    August 8, 2007 at 7:59 pm

    I like Kucinich; I voted for him in the ’04 primary. (I’m in Arizona; our primaries are basically useless. Kerry was long since a sure thing by the time our turn rolled around.)

    Barring any surprise move of our primary date, I’ll probably vote for him again.

  2. DrGail says:
    August 8, 2007 at 10:26 pm

    I was at that debate, and it seemed to me like the vast majority of the audience liked his “pull no punches” style and his general lack of nuance, but don’t see him as a serious (or even desirable) candidate.

    Applause lines are always fun and the heat made everyone want to get rowdy, but most of the cheering for what he had to say was intended more to get the other candidates riled up so they would mix it up, and not because they actually believed him.

    He came across as a character — kind of like a rodeo clown.

    With that said, this was the first debate I’d ever attended and the first time I’d been to any union event, so maybe I misread the mood.

  3. C.S.Strowbridge says:
    August 8, 2007 at 10:32 pm

    This is the difference between the right and the left. We know our crazy man has no shot at winning, even if we like what he stands for.

    I argue all the time with Ron Paul supporters who honest think he’s got a shot at winning.

  4. Sabutai says:
    August 9, 2007 at 2:52 am

    Come on Oliver. If you’re going to start tossing around the label “anti-Semite”, you need better stuff than someone using the word “bankers.” Anyone who doesn’t click on the link will come away thinking geez maybe Gravel is anti-Semitic, not realizing that accusation is based entirely on your impression of one answer, for which you received agreement from 1 out of 7 comments.

    Heck, I saw Obama lean away from Hillary at a recent debate while she was talking–think he’s racist?

    (An note that Gravel is so far down my preferred list that he’s rubbing shoulders with Republicans)

  5. Enoch Root says:
    August 9, 2007 at 5:08 am

    There are two reasons Kucinich won’t win: 1) He doesn’t play the ‘serious’ foreign policy game, and 2) people keep saying he won’t win because of #1.

  6. drinkof says:
    August 9, 2007 at 12:07 pm

    I have to agree with Sabutai, your throwaway conclusion would be a cheap shot in this context even if were well grounded.

    Which a quick review of the link indicates, it certainly isn’t, if that’s your case. For a guy who’s usually better grounded than this, it’s baffling, honestly.

    Not to mention that your ‘standard’ here would just give the banking industry a free pass for anything, wouldn’t it?