Kucinich, the contender.

• Position: Letter to the editor

You had your chance to give Dennis Kucinich the coverage he and we deserve, and you blew it ("Kucinich's Challenge," by John Nichols, November issue). Instead of laying out his progressive agenda in clear terms, the details of which resonate with your own objectives as well as those of your readers, you chose to run a piece that does nothing more than feed into the pervasive perception that Kucinich is not electable.

Of course, the piece discusses how the media have failed Kucinich, but it neglected to mention that your magazine, being part of the media, has also failed Kucinich. You could have swayed votes toward a true progressive, but your piece likely will dissuade such votes, and so again we'll be stuck with corporate, robot Democrats who bolster the neocon agenda.

Calling yourself The Regressive would make more sense at this point.

Alison Ross

Atlanta, Georgia

"If Kucinich were to commit now to mount a campaign that made no pretense of personal electability"--what?

Cancel my subscription.

Randolph Riddle

Oxford, Mississippi

It should be clear to every progressive thinker by now that Dennis Kucinich is the only candidate who has a legitimate claim to our votes. So you put him on the November cover. That's logical.

But then John Nichols, in the cover piece, once again smears Kucinich with the "can't win" label. And in the very next article, Adolph Reed never even mentions Kucinich in his withering--and deserved--excoriation of what he calls "the serious candidates."

That is a betrayal of a man who speaks bravely to the conscience of America. I believed you would faithfully echo the spirit of Robert La Follette. I am outraged.

Dick Conway

Port Townsend...