The Campaign Trail Less Traveled

Scenes behind the interviews by Sean Carberry

Click here to listen to the interview

Oct. 28, 2003: Manchester, NH. Congressman Dennis Kucinich has staked out the left-most ground among the candidates vying for the Democratic nomination. He is co- chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. He espouses a single payer, non-profit system of universal healthcare, repeal of the PATRIOT Act, withdrawal from NAFTA and the WTO, the signing of all international treaties including Kyoto, the International Criminal Court, and the arms treaties, guaranteed Pre-K-college education, and the immediate withdrawal of troops from Iraq (based on the transfer of authority to the United Nations). He would also scrap the doctrine of preemption and create a cabinet- level Department of Peace that would work with the world community to make non-violence an organizing principle.

Although his message resonates with the liberal wing of the Democratic Party (and is catching the interest of Green Party members, such as the unofficial New Hampshire Green Party who endorsed Kucinich), his candidacy is not resonating in the polls. He has been stepping up his efforts in New Hampshire, trying to reach more voters, but he is still polling around one percent, alongside Reverend Al Sharpton and Ambassador Moseley Braun.

On this October Tuesday, the congressman was in the midst of a heavy day of campaigning in New Hampshire. He started the morning at the Bedford Village Inn, where he participated in the Politics & Eggs series--one of the many campaign traditions in the Granite State. From there, he traveled to Mont Vernon to speak to a kindergarten class, and then on to the Institute of Politics at St. Anselm College.

The congressman arrived 20 minutes late at St. Anselm, where he spoke to Professor Dale Kuehne's “Introduction to Politics” class. The small classroom held about 15 students who gave the candidate a courteous welcome, but showed no real signs of excitement at having a presidential candidate address them. The congressman began speaking to the class by asking them to “imagine the most far- reaching vision, of the potential of the nation.” He outlined his vision and why he’s running for president. He listed his ideals of healthcare for all, jobs, education, “an America which acts on an holistic vision of a world as one, of a world that’s interconnected and interdependent.”

The congressman proceeded to speak about things concrete and spiritual, which seemed to keep the students a little off balance. Most people are used to candidates talking about specific policy proposals, criticisms of other candidates' policies, and ultimately, a little fire and brimstone. Kucinich defied all paradigms in his speech to the students. He used phrases, such as “qualitative transformation of social and political structures.” He quoted George Orwell, John F. Kennedy, and often left the specifics of policy to make broad philosophical points about the world and America’s role in it.

Only when discussing the PATRIOT Act did the congressman step up his intensity and delivery, but for the most part he was fairly laid back as he took questions from the students. On the whole, the students sat back and seemed to be listening. It was difficult to tell whether they were intently following, and at times trying to decipher the meaning of some of the congressman’s more abstract points, or whether they were simply humoring him. At no point, did Kucinich speak of specific issues directed at the students—financial aid programs, job creation, or even the environment, but rather he stuck to issues of foreign policy and civil liberties.

His talk was neither rousing nor empowering, and the students politely listened, but never showed any sign of deep interest. At no time did the congressman try to inject any humor into his conversation, and he seemed tense the entire time—it was a slightly off-putting intensity, and he showed no warmth as one would expect in such an intimate setting. He has often been criticized for his edginess and abrasive demeanor, and it seems to come from his passionately held beliefs, and his burning desire to convince people he sees the right path for America. He’s perhaps a little too earnest for his own good, and despite the fact that some of the students might have agreed with his points, his delivery made it very difficult for them to get on board. People have a tendency to be more conscious of his demeanor than his message, and this classroom was clearly full of tension, as students struggled with what to make of the congressman and his delivery.

After he finished his talk to the class, Kucinich walked out of the room quietly talking about transformational change and bringing forth the America that’s possible. He proceeded down the hall to a conference room for a luncheon with students. He sat at a large table with more than 20 students and they proceeded to eat and have a more informal conversation. Students questioned him about universal healthcare, international law, and his views on abortion. He was asked if there is a place in the Democratic Party for pro-life supporters.

“There’s a place in American politics to try to reconcile this very divisive issue,” he said. “I have familiarity with both sides of that equation, because while throughout my career I tried to make abortions less necessary through sex education and birth control, there was a time when I voted in such a way that I thought that by restricting abortion that it would create less abortions. As I watched the issue work its way through the Congress, and I saw Congress a couple of years ago pass a law that said that it would place restrictions on late term abortions without regard to the health of the woman, the Supreme Court ruled that if you don’t have an exception for the woman’s health, it’s not legal. I saw Congress taking a different position on this…so that caused me to start to look at the issue in a different light.”

His response to that question was one of the few moments where he lowered his defenses and spoke plainly and honestly, with no noticeable edge. Still the luncheon conversation was not as loose as it could have been given the informal setting, and again there was no levity to break up the intensity of the issues discussed or the candidate’s generally serious demeanor.

After lunch, we sat down with the congressman and conducted our interview. He spoke for nearly 20 minutes, and the entire time Kucinich maintained laser-like eye contact with Bob Oakes. Kucinich didn’t shy away from any question, and was completely engaged in the conversation. Again, he seemed on edge the entire time, and even though he was only addressing Bob Oakes, he came across as if he were speaking to a large audience of the unconverted. Bob later remarked that it felt like the congressman was peering not just into Bob’s eyes, but through the back of his head—he found it a bit disconcerting.

When challenged to respond to the assessment that he’s too far to the left to be electable, Kucinich came back with one of the more compelling responses he gave all day. “I don’t see what’s being far out advocating workers rights,” he said, “and I don’t know what’s far out about saying everyone ought to have healthcare, and what’s far out about saying that every child should have an education from age three all the way through to college that should be paid for. What’s far out about advocating peace and challenging this administration’s march to war in Iraq. Actually I think I’m probably more mainstream than all the other candidates.”

Whether or not his views are mainstream is subject to debate, but his answer squared with his response to a question posed to him after an event in Cambridge, MA in September. Asked if he felt that his progressive platform put him out of step with the Democratic Party and effectively made it impossible for the party to support him, without missing a beat, he replied that as the party stands, he doesn’t want its support. He believes the party is heading in the wrong direction, and “for years [he has] been trying to move it in a more progressive direction.” He believes that the moderate approach is only going to empower the Republican Party, and that the Democratic Party must firmly plant itself to the left. This is why he’s in the race, because he believes the party is compromising itself, and he wants to see the party boom the way it did under FDR.

This explains his answer to the last question of the interview with Bob Oakes when Kucinich said he would not run as a third party candidate, and instead he wants “to see the Democratic Party to become a viable second party.” With that the interview ended, and as the congressman stood up, he flashed a genuine smile. Clearly pleased with his remark, he let that stand as an implication of the motivation behind his run for the presidency. His point is that the Democratic Party has been struggling to define itself in the face of the assertive Republican Party, and trying to be Republican-light is not the right course. Kucinich (as does Reverend Al Sharpton) views the Democratic Party as trying to define itself in a way that does not stake its own unapologetic, progressive identity, but rather tries to nuance itself around the Republican platform. Ultimately, he’s as concerned with saving the Democratic Party as he is about winning the White House.

Kucinich has to know deep down that he cannot win the nomination, but if he can get his message out and make a point, he can still claim a moral victory. It’s extremely unlikely the Democratic Party will follow his lead to the left, and many still wonder if that’s the route the party should take. There’s no question it’s been searching for its identity since the 2000 election, and maybe Kucinich is right to say the party needs to turn left, stake its ground and provide a stark contrast to the Republican Party. It’s a huge gamble, and the smart money is against the party taking that risk.