Democrat Dennis Kucinich knows how to get his way. The presidential candidate successfully petitioned a federal judge to get him into MSNBC’s Democratic debate in Nevada tonight.
Charles Thompson, a senior district court judge for Clark County, Nevada, said he would issue an injunction stopping the debate if Mr. Kucinich is excluded.
In a statement, MSNBC responded: “We disagree with the judge’s decision and are filing an appeal.”
The Kucinich campaign said it received an invitation to the debate on Jan. 9, only to have the offer revoked two days later by NBC.
We’re all about the democratic process and equal access, but if Kucinich is so concerned, why didn’t he sue on behalf of his other long shot peers?
bobito
Kucinich had qualified to take part in that debate by placing 4th in a national poll. MSNBC then changed the requirements for participation in the debate, after Kucinich had already been invited to participate, so that of all the other participants, he alone would no longer qualify. Thus, other long-shot candidates who hadn’t placed as high as 4th in a national poll wouldn’t have been invited to the debate in the first place.
Alexa
Exactly. Gravel didn’t qualify under the original requirements, Kucinich did. NBC changed the requirements after the fact to deliberately exclude Kucinich and rescinded their invitation to him. That was blatantly wrong.
Stephen
Out of hillary, obama and edwards, kucinich is the ONLY candidate that supports homosexuals.
Meeg
Ugh, whatever. He’s just going to waste airtime so that we get to hear less from people who actually have a chance of winning. Honestly, who cares what Kucinich thinks about immigration or whatever he’s not going to be the next president.
Anna
Without Kucinich all we get to hear is the same media sold candidates lying through their teeth.
Everyone should care about listening to opposing views, its a debate not an infomercial or a beauty contest.
Next time it might be your candidate, or even yourself that gets marginalized by the media.
It may be your voice that gets silenced because you have not been bolstered up to appear popular.
The airwaves that belong to the people will finally be made use of by the people.
todd
I voted for Kucinich just to keep him in the debates. With him, at least a true democratic view is presented to the people. Otherwise, we just get the same corporate crap restated three different ways.
gay as life
I will vote for Kucinich whenever I can.
hells kitchen guy
Because, Meeg, he challenges the other candidates’ positions from the podium, that’s why! The real question is why MSNBC is wasting its legal expenses fighting this. Why not just say, “OK, let him in.” Then TV executives wonder why no one watches anymore.
Alexa
I’m getting completely sick of the media/big business deciding who is a viable or suitable candidate. NBC changes the rules to exclude Kucinich from the debate, CNN excludes Edwards from its latest opinion poll, where will it end?
ee.em.bee
Big business isn’t deciding viability; voters in Iowa and NH have already started that process, as have national polls. Kucinich is a gadfly, and while he brings amusement value to the debate and (largely becuase he’s an unelectable gadfly with no hope of even being an influence on the ultimate nominee) is free to take extreme positions that resonate with various elements of the party (like ourhomoselves), he’s basically a waste of space and, as has been pointed out, just takes time away from the candidates who are likely to be the nominee. I want to hear more from Edwards, Obama, and Clinton; I can totally do without the ravings of Kucinich. At least we’re spared the equally pointless ramblings of Gravel.
And I’m not sure that any media outlet is necessarily obliged to provide a forum to all the candidates. Here, MSNBC was wrong to rescind an invitation by changing the rules after the fact, though, which was probably the court’s point.
praenomenal
ee.em.bee:
You may be comfortable with NBC/CBS/CNN et al deciding your candidates, I am not. With only 2 Primaries down and one dem taking each it is still anybodies game.
ProfessorVP
Kucinich is the worst nightmare of Hillary, Obama and Edwards. Without Kucinich, it leaves the impression that of course you can’t just pull out of Iraq immediately, and you certainly can’t have marriage equality… those ideas are too radical for the Democratic party. With Kucinich there, a reasonable man and always totally prepared, speaking the truth, it throws a wrench in the same tired old ideas of triangulation bullshit. Of course the media is complicit. Why do you suppose of all the questions in the world one could ask, Kucinich was asked if he had really seen a UFO? The idea is that Dennis is nuts, and so therefore all his ideas are crazy, including impeaching both Bush and Cheney… the most sane idea in the world.
Mike Rockland
It’s always entertaining reading comments from people that don’t connect the fact that media like ABC and NBC have kept most people from hearing and seeing Congressman Kucinich to the fact that most Americans haven’t heard or seen him and so don’t get to vote for him.
Un-electable is recently invented concept. Here’s how it works. You get yourself a big audience by pandering to everyone’s basest interests and then you holler as often as you can “LOSER” about anyone that threatens your profits. Except instead of hollering “loser”, which sounds so “high-school-cafeteria”, you shout “UN-ELECTABLE” which is meaningless but new and sounds kind of world-wise. It’s purpose is to convince people that something has already happened when it hasn’t even started, so as to cripple anyone you consider threatening.
I’m not buying. I still subscribe to the old fashioned theory that in a democracy the election is determined by the Americans who go into the booth and vote.
If we want the President to be a person who represents Americans instead of corporations we’re going to have to get used to the idea that we’ll have to look beyond the curtain that corporate media constructs to find that person.
This President of the people is unlikely to have a warchest (aptly named) of $100 million at their disposal, as Clinton and Obama do, and so their message is going to that much harder to hear.
I also don’t buy someone “looking Presidential”. I’m not interested in my President’s TV ratings. I’m interested in their character and their record on the issues.
libhomo
Why would anyone posting here want the most pro-lgbt candidate excluded from the Democratic debates? That makes no sense.
Bob Wendel
We can’t have a real Democracy if we don’t have real choice, and we can’t MAKE a real choice as long as big conglomerates pre-decide who our choices will be based primarily on those candidates who have the richest war chests, and thus, the most money to spend with these same conglomerates in Political advertisements! I’m a big Keith Olbermann fan, so I’m so disappointed that he’s not even broached this subject as of last night’s show. Seems to me that both Keith and NBC are candidates for his “Worst Persons” awards tonight.
ee.em.bee
Interesting, thoughtful comments — thanks for those, and I’ll backpedal a bit having read ’em and given it another think.
So no, I guess I’m NOT comfortable with major media outlets filtering my access to candidates based on arbitrary criteria like delegate count after only two voting events, or money raised, or height. Doesn’t make me any fonder of Kucinich (I STILL think he’s a gadfly and a waste of space — and I reject the notion that he’s “pro-lgbt” just because he says the right buzzwords– but my opinion shouldn’t be a filtering criteria either, I suppose, much as I might like it to be).
But doesn’t a line have to be drawn somewhere, sometime? Or do we think that the networks and cable news channels have to include all candidates, all the time? Seems to me at some point there needs to be a reality-check, or we’ll never get to hear substantive answers. There’s a world of information out there, and the candidates’ positions are readily available on the web and in local campaign headquarters: maybe voters need to be more self-reliant, more grass-roots-oriented, and less insistent on being spoonfed everything by their televisions.
truth
The judge enjoining MSNBC to let Kucinich into the debate is NOT a “federal judge,” as stated in your headline, but a State court judge sitting in Clark County, Nevada.
MSNBC has filed an emergency petition for a writ of prohibition (similar to an appeal) asking the Nevada Supreme Court to vacate the judge’s order. A decision from the Nevada Supreme Court should issue imminently.
truth
The Nevada Supreme Court issued the writ of prohibition, finding that the State court judge manifestly abused his discretion. Kucinich is OUT of tonight’s debate. Here’s the link for the Nevada Supreme Court’s opinion:
http://www.nvsupremecourt.us/highProfile/index.php?caseID=18
Meeg
Didn’t Kucinch told all his supporters to vote for Obama in the Iowa caucus?! Then he wants to participate in the debate like a serious candidate. Please.