WASHINGTON - "Isn't
Kucinich supposed to be around here somewhere?" I asked
an ABC News security guard at a scheduled rally location
in Manchester, New Hampshire.
"Who?" asked the
security guard.
"Dennis Kucinich."
"Who's he with?"
"He's a Democratic
candidate for president from Ohio."
"Haven't
seen him," replied the security guard, in one of those
statements that speak volumes.
Dennis Kucinich,
former mayor of Cleveland and congressman from Ohio,
polled just over 1 percent in the New Hampshire primary
and another 1 percent in the Iowa caucuses. Al Sharpton,
a Pentecostal preacher from New York, fared even worse,
earning 222 votes in all of New Hampshire. Joseph
Lieberman, the Democratic senator from Connecticut,
earned 9 percent of the primary vote in New Hampshire
after skipping Iowa to focus all his resources and
attention on New Hampshire; he declared the results a
"three-way tie for third" and pledged to soldier on.
Kucinich, Sharpton, and Carol Moseley Braun, who
dropped out of the nomination race before Iowa, were
never given even an outside chance to win the
presidential nomination by anyone but their press
officers, and Lieberman has not been anything more than
a dark-horse long shot since serious campaigning began.
What makes these candidates stay in the race, and what
makes them run in the first place?
Despite the
rhetoric and the campaigning, winning is not the prime
objective for some of the candidates. Sure, Wes Clark,
Howard Dean, John Edwards, Lieberman, and John Kerry are
in it for the big prize, but "second tier" candidates
frequently use the nomination process as a vehicle to
achieve other ends. Jerry Mayer, professor of political
science at George Mason University and author of several
books on the US presidency, explains that "Kucinich and
Sharpton are similar in that neither is in this to win
the nomination." Many candidates run to draw
attention to an issue. If they can get enough media
attention or stir up enough support, they can sometimes
force the party to incorporate their issue stance into
the platform or force the more mainstream candidates to
tweak their own strategies. There are other, more
selfish reasons, as well. Lawrence O'Rourke, a columnist
for the Minnesota Star Tribune who is closely watching
this year's field of dark horses, said: "Some run to get
material for a book they will someday write about their
lives in politics. Some run just to get a little
attention and have some fun, but most discover it is
hard work raising the money and traveling to keep up the
campaign."
Candidates who run to draw attention
to a particular cause or issue sometimes face an uphill
battle. Mark McGuire, television/media columnist for the
Hearst Newspapers group, said: "It's a tough decision
for a media outlet to decide how much coverage a
candidate deserves. Often we judge who gets airtime and
print space based on viability." This year the Democrats
seem to be paying more attention to the viability issue
in their attempt to select the candidate with the best
chance to beat President George W Bush. Since a
candidate's electability is closely tied to his or her
image as well as standing in the polls, people are not
as likely to support sweeping platforms. "The problem
with that is that we may be ignoring some important
messages that deserved to be vetted and out in the
public forum, so we may be missing something in the
process," said McGuire.
The consensus among
experts is that Kucinich is running to draw attention to
one issue: his opposition to the Iraq war. Kucinich has
the strongest anti-war credentials of the bunch he was
co-chair of the House Progressive Caucus with California
Democrat Nancy Pelosi (House minority leader), voting
against the resolution to invade Iraq and helping to
organize the 125 other House Democrats who opposed the
measure. "He has risen as high as he can in Ohio
politics. He will never be senator or governor, and he
has nothing to lose," said Dr Mayer.
Speaking
about his chances, Kucinich said: "I expect to go to the
convention with a bloc of votes ... the bar's been set
so low ... Most people are saying I'm not even a blip on
the screen."
Though he has no chance, pundits
agree that Kucinich, along with Dean, have made the
mainstream candidates' support of the war resolution an
issue; Kerry and Edwards have struggled to explain away
their support for the resolutions authorizing the Iraq
war. Kucinich is the only candidate to promise
explicitly to withdraw US troops, but other candidates
have been forced to craft plans to increase
international involvement in the occupation.
So
Kucinich can take some credit for altering the face of
the nomination process, and he does raise some important
points. He also favors abolishing the World Trade
Organization and withdrawing from the North American
Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). These stands push the
mainstream candidates to explain and define their own
positions in specific terms with concrete programs, or
at the very least to convince voters that while
Kucinich's suggestions may sound attractive, they are
not practical. "He deserves a hearing of some form,
and I do believe that he's gotten it to a certain
extent," said McGuire, the Hearst Newspapers media
columnist.
Kucinich's "Zen moments", overt
spirituality, and popularity among the hippie set
sometimes overshadow his issue focus, though. A strict
vegan, Kucinich describes his politics as rooted in "a
spiritual sense of the interconnectedness of the world".
His home-town newspaper, the Cleveland Plain Dealer,
declared early in his campaign that he "is at risk of
becoming tagged 'the Moonbeam Congressman'". No matter
the outcome, though, Kucinich has become a kind of
counter-culture celebrity, and will always be an
effective spokesman for social-justice issues.
Sharpton's motivations are different. "Sharpton
is running to become the de facto leader of black
America," said Mayer. "He hopes to replace Jesse
Jackson. The campaign is worth, ultimately, millions of
dollars to Sharpton over the next 10 years. If he does
well in South Carolina, and becomes the face of black
America for many whites, he has speaking engagements and
income for years."
The reverend has the quickest
tongue in the field, and his one-liners make any debate
interesting and all his appearances entertaining: "We
got the down, but we didn't get the trickle," referring
to the so-called trickle-down effect of "Reaganomics";
Howard Dean "is sounding more like Stonewall Jackson
than Jesse Jackson", referring to Dean's stance on
affirmative action; and "We can't find [Osama] bin
Laden? Bin Laden has more video than a rock star."
Sharpton has said he will continue his campaign right up
until the convention to raise awareness of black
American interests, all but admitting to a crowd in
Houston that he will lose: "There are six Democratic
candidates who will lose. Don't act like I will be the
only loser."
Sharpton's campaign will also buy
him some influence in the Democratic Party; in the
future he will be a useful asset in mobilizing the black
vote, and his endorsement may translate into some input
into political nominations.
Sharpton, Kucinich
and Braun have all raised their profile with their
campaigns. Before 2003, most people outside Ohio and
Indiana probably had never heard of Dennis Kucinich or
Carol Moseley Braun. Now the former is an instantly
recognizable crusader against the war in Iraq, while the
latter has become an icon and role model for women
seeking careers in politics. Sharpton, who first rose to
prominence during the Tawana Brawley affair (in which
the New York teen claimed to have been the victim of a
racially motivated kidnapping; Sharpton supported
Brawley's claim, which was later shown to be a hoax), is
shoring up his image as a black leader and becoming more
palatable to whites.
All three candidates'
campaigns were accepted and treated as equal by the
Democratic Party. This ensures that the candidates will
be able to participate in debates and other events,
enabling them free exposure for their stances. In
addition, one advantage to the not-running-to-win
candidacy is that there is reduced fundraising pressure.
Sharpton and Kucinich spend very little on television
advertising and can operate their campaigns with
skeleton staffs.
The crusader-type of candidate
must walk a fine line between being the champion of an
issue and pushing to its heart - and being labeled a
"fringe candidate" who does not know when to quit.
O'Rourke, the Minnesota newspaper columnist, points out
that US political stories are often about the horse race
itself, not about particular issues. An example of this
is the media treatment of Howard Dean's performance in
Iowa and New Hampshire. The focus has been on the fact
that Dean was far ahead of the rest of the field in the
polls just weeks before the elections, but suffered
bitter defeats as other candidates surged. There are
fewer stories about which issues people found important,
and why there was a sudden sea-change in sentiment.
Kucinich, who has campaigned in every state, is
rapidly becoming a footnote, his power to draw national
media attention fading. It behooves a candidate like
Kucinich to strike while the iron is hot, going on the
offensive early while he still enjoys a respectable
amount of coverage, so he can force his issue into the
spotlight. US voters are fickle and easily bored. While
Iowa demonstrated that the Dean-Kucinich opposition to
the Iraq war only plays so long, Sharpton's gift for gab
has helped him hold the spotlight.
As for
Lieberman, most agree that his days are numbered on the
campaign trail. "Unlike Kucinich and Sharpton, Lieberman
has a future in higher office. He has a reputation to
preserve. He's not going to stay in the race much
longer," posits Mayer.
Syndicated columnist
Richard Reeves adds that it's just a question of timing:
"Lieberman is, or soon will be, searching for a
dignified way out." Lieberman, who once pictured himself
as the heir apparent to former vice president and failed
presidential candidate Al Gore, suffered a serious
setback when Gore endorsed Dean. Nevertheless,
Lieberman, who has very strong political credentials and
is well respected in Washington, has to think about his
reputation and his future. "He could become some
Democrat's secretary of state, or a smart Republican's
cabinet officer." His centrist views and support for the
Iraq war, as well as his experience and knowledge, make
him attractive to whichever party is in power when the
next round of political appointments begins after the
election.
The long-shot candidates play an
important role in US politics, and thanks to the media
their messages are instantly available to anyone with a
modicum of interest in the process. And it helps to
remember that the long shot is not a no-shot; Bill
Clinton, once labeled a long shot, became the "comeback
kid", and then the president. Former front-runner Howard
Dean once had barely a glimmer of hope; for example, in
August 2002 the Weekly Standard described him as "a
possible dark-horse candidate for the Democratic
nomination in 2004" in an article entitled "Harebrained
Howard".
Outsider candidates keep the process
fresh, challenging mainstream candidates to refine their
stances; they turn on voters who otherwise might not be
interested in the process, and they challenge their
political parties to maintain their relevance to the
shifting tastes of the electorate.
(Copyright
2004 Asia Times Online Co, Ltd. All rights reserved.
Please contact content@atimes.com for
information on our sales and syndication
policies.)
Jan 31, 2004
No
material from Asia Times Online may be republished in any form without written
permission.
Copyright
2003, Asia Times Online, 4305 Far East Finance Centre, 16 Harcourt Rd,
Central, Hong Kong