I don't know about Kucinich, but I remember that someone was complaining about his singing of "America the Beautiful" at his rallies and how embarrassing it was. Maybe that hurt.
Also, Nader is likely falling because of the view that any vote for Nader is a vote for Bush. BTW, one reason for the lack of Kerry "bounce" is that so many pro-Bush people are hard-core and would never shift. Also, Krugman's column in today's NY TIMES suggests that the media did Kerry in. (BTW, when will PK get back to Ec?) ------------------------ Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine Michael Perelman: > Kucinich had no money supporting him; Kerry has an "organize" > (well, well-funded) > party. Gore's support picked up when he did populism, so > would Kerry's. All he had > to do was to take Edwards' 2-America's riff a bit further. > > On Tue, Aug 03, 2004 at 03:52:16PM -0400, Doug Henwood wrote: > > If there's a great untapped reservoir of leftish populism in the > > American masses, why did Kucinich do so badly in the primaries, and > > why is Nader now down around 2%?
