E-Mail This Article to a Friend Running on ideas (continued) BY ADAM REILLY

MOST DIE-HARD Kucinich supporters have bigger plans, however. And they have a rebuttal for every knock on the Ohio congressman’s perceived unelectability. For example, Adam Sacks — one of Kucinich’s Massachusetts coordinators and a former campaign manager for Green gubernatorial candidate Jill Stein — insists that even as Kucinich tanks in polls that target likely Democratic voters, he’s causing a stir in populations the polls neglect, including third-party members and registered but inactive voters alienated by the political status quo. "We get people all the time who say they’ve never been active in politics before or haven’t voted in 40 years, and this year they’re voting for Dennis," Sacks says.

He also asserts that, despite Kucinich’s presence at every Democratic debate to date, the candidate is being unfairly marginalized by the media. "Dennis is aggressively kept out of the newspapers," Sacks claims. "Reporters or editors will write things about the candidates who say this or that against the war, about health care, whatever, and they’ll just leave him out of the article completely.... In effect, the press is controlling what the public gets to hear. And that determines electability or nonelectability to a large extent, which is all just an impression that people have."

The media’s ability to shape public perceptions of a given candidate is incontestable. And as the case of Al Gore’s alleged (and nonexistent) claim to have invented the Internet shows, fabrications can become indistinguishable from facts when the press fails to do its job. But the fact remains that candidates with poor numbers can’t expect the same coverage as front-runners. (See "Howell’s Dilemma," News and Features, October 13, 2000.) As for the notion that the best-known polls are structurally biased against Kucinich, the true test of Sacks’s claim will come when primary and caucus season begins in January. But Northeastern’s Mayer regards this claim with impatience. "Any time somebody is down in the polls in his position, one of the standard arguments is that for one reason or another the polls aren’t picking up his constituency," he says. "Barry Goldwater made the same argument, and note how well it turned out in his case."

However, one bit of evidence Kucinich and his supporters cite to show he’s a viable candidate — his ability to mobilize some third-party voters — has at least some validity. Richard Winger — editor of "Ballot Access News," a newsletter that tracks election-law developments affecting minor parties — dismisses the notion that Kucinich, a consistent opponent of privatization, is attracting Libertarians. But he adds that Kucinich is faring well with both the Natural Law Party and the Greens. "He’s done a magnificent job of wooing over the Natural Law Party," Winger says. (On September 25, former Natural Law presidential candidate John Hagelin, citing Kucinich’s commitment to nonviolence, urged his constituency to donate to the Kucinich campaign before September 30, the deadline for third-quarter contributions. "Dennis Kucinich has proven again and again that he will take a bold, principled, unequivocal stance for peace in our world," Hagelin wrote in a Web posting. "The generosity of Natural Law Party supporters in the last quarter was instrumental to Dennis’s surprising performance on this crucial test of national support. This time, Dennis is poised to surpass his previous fundraising record — and such evidence of widespread grassroots support is critical for media coverage of his message and his campaign successes.") And the Greens? "I think he’s doing a good job with them," Winger says.

That he is. Ralph Nader, the Green presidential candidate in 2000 and the man many Democrats still hold responsible for George W. Bush’s presidency, has spoken favorably of Kucinich’s candidacy and urged Democrats to back Kucinich in the Democratic primaries and caucuses. The two men will appear together at the October 7 Democracy Rising rally in Washington, DC. Steve Cobble, a Nader strategist in 2000, is now Kucinich’s national strategist. Greens like Sacks have been drawn to Kucinich’s candidacy because, ideologically speaking — with his opposition to the Iraq war, his critique of globalization, his advocacy of a multilateral foreign policy, his opposition to the death penalty, and his stances on a host of other issues — he could easily be a Green. Most appealing of all to Green voters is Kucinich’s insistence on paradigm-busting social transformation — for example, Kucinich’s stated goal of making nonviolence an "organizing principle in society" — as opposed to remaining content with incremental change.

Kucinich knows this, and he’s played it to the hilt. On July 24, he sent an "Open Letter to Nader Voters and the Greens" asking for their support. "When we marched against the WTO and the corporate trade regime in Seattle in 1999, we marched together," Kucinich wrote. "When we stood together against the war with Iraq, half-a-million strong in New York City, and 15 million strong throughout the world, we stood together. When we fought the badly-named ‘Patriot Act,’ we fought it together — and I was the only one running who voted against it." He concluded: "We all know we will do better if we work together. Perhaps we can find common ground on issues and principles. I would like to open up that possibility. And I would like to ask that you give serious consideration to my candidacy for President. Because a better world is still possible."

The uncertainty surrounding the Green Party’s presidential plans in 2004 has made Kucinich’s sell easier. The party still hasn’t decided whether to run a presidential candidate next year, and may not make that choice until its 2004 national convention. Some Greens are sufficiently disturbed by the current administration that they feel unseating Bush should take priority; others believe it’s more important to build the party’s national profile and maintain a Green presence on state ballots around the country, a goal that could be undermined if no Green runs for president. Against the backdrop of this internal debate, two of the Greens’ highest-profile potential candidates — Nader and former Georgia congresswoman Cynthia McKinney (see "Flirting with Disaster," News and Features, January 23) — have voiced interest in running but have yet to commit. And many Greens resent the unwillingness of Nader, who has never registered as a Green Party member, to take that step and to work to build the party’s base.

For Democrats who still blame Nader for Gore’s defeat in 2000, the prospect of Greens breaking from their party to back a Democratic candidate — particularly if it’s damaging to Green aspirations — might seem like poetic justice. But while the party’s institutional ambivalence has helped draw Greens like Sacks to Kucinich, there are plenty of other Greens who balk at Kucinich’s pitch. "I think some Greens think that if everyone were to register as a Democrat and vote for Kucinich in the primaries, he would do much better," observes Nancy Allen, media coordinator for the Green Party of the United States. "But there are a lot of us — maybe we’re just more cynical — who understand that Dennis’ battle is much, much greater than his wonderful stand on issues. It’s part of a struggle for the soul of the Democratic Party, and that’s the battle, and it’s been lost years ago."

Even among Greens who won’t change their registration to support Kucinich’s Democratic candidacy, though, the congressman’s allure remains considerable. Kenny Mostern, a California political consultant and Green activist who served as Green gubernatorial candidate Peter Camejo’s fundraiser in 2002, responded to Kucinich’s missive with an open letter of his own. In it, Mostern urged Kucinich to seek the Green and Democratic presidential nominations simultaneously. Mostern acknowledges that, in the unlikely event that Kucinich secured the Democratic nomination, this two-pronged approach could pose considerable legal problems. But despite this recognition — and the fact that he hasn’t heard back from the Kucinich campaign — Mostern stands behind his proposal. "From a campaigning point of view, it would make an immense difference for Dennis Kucinich," Mostern says. "He doesn’t lack support in the Democratic Party because no people agree with him; he lacks support because he’s already been defined as a far-left, unelectable candidate. If he wants to get taken seriously by middle-of-the-road Democratic hacks, the way to do it is to actively seek the Green nomination. Then, suddenly, he has a power base that scares them."

There’s another possibility as well — namely, that Kucinich, after struggling through the Democratic primaries and caucuses without his anticipated progressive support materializing, might consider running as a Green Party candidate. That scenario is examined — and dismissed — in the FAQ section of Kucinich’s official Web site (www.kucinich.net), where he expresses his support for Green principles but adds that one of his goals is building a progressive Democratic Party. (Repeated efforts to obtain comment from Kucinich on this issue by press time were unsuccessful.) A Green candidacy could also have a negative impact on Kucinich’s political future: there’s been speculation that Kucinich may use increased visibility from his presidential run to seek a US Senate seat or Ohio’s governorship, and a third-party run could hurt his chances in his home state. On the other hand, Kucinich’s insistence that he won’t run as a Green is inextricable from his belief that his political vision has a place in the Democratic Party — and that belief could be compromised in the coming months. If he has a change of heart, the Greens would be happy to have him.

"We would welcome Dennis Kucinich to become a Green," Allen says. "He is supporting so many of our Green values that he really is the perfect Green, if he can just get away from the weight of the dinosaur the Democratic Party has become."

FOR NOW, THOUGH, Kucinich’s goal remains the Democratic nomination — and as he stumped in Cambridge on September 19, Kucinich did his best to convince progressive voters that their views belong in the Democratic Party. At his first Cambridge stop — a Massachusetts Peace Action awards dinner at the First Church in Cambridge, Congregational — he called for the creation of a US Department of Peace that would be charged with combating everything from terrorism to gangs to anti-gay violence. He bashed the Bush administration’s unilateralism and doctrine of pre-emptive war, and demanded reintegration into the international community. He wove references to the Book of Isaiah and the works of Alfred, Lord Tennyson and futurist Barbara Marx Hubbard into a call for a revolution in consciousness: "We are not victims of the world we see," Kucinich said to appreciative nods from the crowd. "We are victims of the way we see the world!"

A few minutes later, thanks to the efforts of a forward-thinking staffer, Kucinich entered his campaign reception at Harvard-Epworth United Methodist Church to a tremulous sing-along of "Imagine." He proceeded to talk policy, promising to end the federal death penalty, reform the "prison-industrial complex," and stop the privatization of government agencies. Once again, Kucinich peppered his speech with inspirational references — this time it was to Robert Kennedy and Percy Bysshe Shelley — and sounded more than one New Age–y clarion call. ("It’s the power of our consciousness to create new worlds," he said at one point. "We’re capable of doing it. So let’s talk.")

Kucinich also delivered his electability pitch. He announced that he’s drawing support from third-party voters and students who usually dismiss politics as phony. He noted that Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton were polling poorly at this point in the elections of 1976 and 1992, and told a questioner he’s committed to staying in the race until the end. He also predicted that no candidate will have a majority heading into next year’s 2004 Democratic National Convention, and claimed the convention will choose the nominee. "My plan is to emerge late," Kucinich announced. "Circumstances kind of dictate that anyhow" — the audience and the candidate shared a laugh at this reference to his weak numbers — "but I think we’re right on time."

Television is not kind to Kucinich. In the Democratic debates, he’s come across as youthful, elfin, and occasionally shrill. In person, he’s more compelling: quick on his feet, funny, and unexpectedly charismatic. By the time Kucinich wrapped things up at Harvard-Epworth, these qualities — coupled with his policy proposals and summons to sweeping systemic change — seemed to have enchanted the crowd. As the audience mingled over vegan sushi and cookies — Kucinich is the first vegan presidential candidate — Christina Jameson’s concern had vanished. "I’m enthused," she said happily. "I’ve had a renewed sense of energy about this campaign from having come. Unequivocally."

Unless something surprising happens soon, though, Jameson’s good vibe may be short-lived.

Adam Reilly can be reached at areilly[a]phx.com