Taking it to the blog

As I’ve implied once or twice before, my mother is a Dennis Kucinich supporter. I’ve bounced around between a number of candidates, finally ending up, like most liberals of my ilk, with Johns Kerry & Edwards. As I’ve also said before, of the serious candidates the one I probably agreed with most was Howard Dean, but I never quite warmed to him (again, like most liberals of my ilk). But anyway, my mother and I have these occasional discussions about Kucinich, most recently, my question of why is his campaign any less vain and wrongheaded than Ralph Nader’s? So she sent me this story, from Alternet, in response.

“From house parties to homemade signs, Kucinich has asked his supporters to reach out to their communities and have a conversation about values. He has brought new activists into the political fold. He has not attacked the other candidates; he has only pointed out his differences with them. He has not threatened to start a new party or to trash the nominee.”

To which my reply is: Prove it. Show me numbers. This looks good in theory, like the very idea of Kucinich’s campaign, but I’m skeptical as to how it actually played out in the world in which we live. I’m putting this out publically because I know one or two others of you are or were Kucinich supporters as well. Is there any proof that Kucinch’s campaign has done what his supporters what to believe it has?

Ben Varkentine