Russ Feingold in '08--What do you think?

[WI_DEM]

Poll question: Russ Feingold in '08--What do you think?

Sen. Feingold has said he is testing the waters. Would you encourage him to run?

[Mass]

1. Not that I do not like him, but 06 is what is important!

I will decide who I support after that!

[WI_DEM]

2. it's just a question

it doesn't mean you don't have to stop focusing on '06 any longer than it would take you to either read the question in the poll and answer it if you want to.

[paineinthearse]

24. If we do not at least win the House in '06

Any future elections will be a sham.

Let's focus on the '06 elections, '08 is an eternity away.

[UrbScotty]

3. The most PROGRESSIVE Democrat in the Senate!

Go Russ!

[Mass]

4. Certainly not!

Boxer and Kennedy are certainly more progressive.

BUt he is certainly the more independant.

[undeterred]

32. But Boxer and Kennedy are hated

Feingold is not as well known and probably has a very low negative rating. Here in WI where he is well known- you wouldn't believe all the diehard Republicans who voted Bush-Feingold. He is a great candidate, still in his early fifties. I think he should be on a future ticket, VP or Pres, 08 or 12.

[Mass]

40. I have nothing against him.

He just is not the most liberal senator, that's all.

He would be a good candidate, on either position. I just think it is too early.

[iwantmycountryback]

5. Most definitely yes

A true progressive Midwestern Democrat who appeals to all kinds of people. The best chance we've got.

[geek tragedy]

6. Sure he should run, but he has no chance of winning the nomination

or the WH.

Great guy whose voice belongs in the Senate.

[Larkspur]

7. I like Feingold and would support him if Gore didn't run, but I don't

think he has much of a chance. His recent divorce killed any chance he had at winning the nomination.

However, if his nomination campaign becomes strong, I could see Hillary making a deal with him to win over the progressive vote. If that's true, I won't vote for a Clinton/Feingold ticket because Hillary would be calling the shots and she is a war crimminal in my book.

[shraby]

8. The man has INTEGRITY!

[nickshepDEM]

9. If he wasnt divorced he would be an OK candidate.

Id support him in the General.

[CWebster]

10. ?

Hillary is married to Bill. Doesn't seem to concern anyone. Reagan was divorced, for what its worth.

[nickshepDEM]

12. Yes, Reagan was divorced, but he remarried long before he ran...

for POTUS. If Feingold remarries now it will look like a political stunt.

[UrbScotty]

13. Who's gonna not vote for him because of the divorce?

Answer: The same people who already wouldn't vote for him even if he hadn't divorced!

[nickshepDEM]

15. Not true. Feingold has a strong populist message, especially economically

I could see people who would potentially vote for him based on economics turning away because of his divorce situation. The first lady has become an institution in American politics.

[UrbScotty]

16. If he remarries by then?

If America has a first lady by then, will anyone really not vote for him because of the divorces who already won't vote for him?

[safi0]

25. That's BS

The type of independent moderates that you discuss won't not vote for him because of his marital situation. The only people who wouldn't vote for him because of that wouldn't vote for him because he's pro-choice

[CWebster]

14. Oh, you are just being a

purist.

[goodhue]

26. It's not the divorce; rather it's the lack of current spouse.

Kerry after all was divorved. But the media seem unable to accept a candidate that does not have a first lady (or man) to go with.

[safi0]

28. When was the

Last time there was a legit. candidate who wasn't married. Don't say Kucinich because as much as we all love him, his candidacy was considered by most to be a joke

[goodhue]

30. Kucinich

Not all of us thought DK was a joke. Some of us went to Boston as national Kucinich delegates. :-) Dennis is getting married this summer, so next time that will be one less strike against him.

Look, I like Feingold a lot and would likely support him. I just know full well that his lack of current spouse will be focus of media.

[safi0]

38. The MSM

regarded Kucinich as a joke. I wasn't that poltically active during the primaries and whenever I would discuss the primaries with friends and family, when Kucinich was discussed it would always be followed by a joke.

I don't doubt that Feingold's lack of a spouse could be made an issue. But I think he's a skilled enough politician that he can overcome that. I definetely don't think its the end-all of his chances like some on this board believe.

[undeterred]

35. I think he will remarry without too much effort

:hi:

[cascadiance]

19. Then why is Newt Gingrich even considering running in 2008?

He's certainly had two uglier breakups than Feingold has had, and he's a member of a party that's supposed to care more about such things!

[goodhue]

27. Gingrich is married, IIRC

[1932]

11. He would be the Kucinich of '08 but with more heft.

He'd be a good addition to the field.

[union_maid]

17. Yes, but I voted yes on Clark, too

I'd also vote Yes for Edwards. I'll support the Democratic candidate in 2008 regardless of who it is. I'd be very enthusiastic about any of those three.

[cascadiance]

18. He's the best on campaign finance and civil liberties issues!

And we sorely need someone with leadership in those areas (i.e. Fiengold-McCain) that I rank as most important areas to fix things once we can get these bums out of office now!

[election_2004]

20. Yes...as the VICE-PRESIDENTIAL running mate

I love Russ...back when I was suicidal (because of someone on DU, actually), it was his answer to my question at one of his listening sessions that literally turned my life around.

But I honestly think the "twice-divorced" part (coupled with his religion) would hurt him in too many places that the Democrats need to win.

However, in the V.P. slot, Feingold could be an effective attack dog *AND* energize progressive voters.

Lincoln/Feingold 2008!!!

[ulysses]

21. I've already been encouraging him.

:thumbsup:

[MoonRiver]

22. I like him, but I like Clark more.

So I picked "maybe". If Clark doesn't run I could get behind him. I am nervous about having Senators run though.

[AntiCoup2K4]

23. Feingold would make a great VP

...but not a nominee for President as SENATORS DO NOT GET ELECTED.

[leyton]

37. I'm so sick of this no-Senator stuff.

Who were the most recent Senators to run?

Kennedy - a charismatic young man who won.
Goldwater - a radical who challenged a popular incumbent and lost.
McGovern - a pacifist who challenged a popular incumbent and lost.
Dole - a boring old coot who challenged a popular incumbent and lost.
Kerry - a less-than-charismatic (and flawed in other ways) man who nearly unseated a wartime incumbent Republican (a feat not yet achieved in this country).

Many Senators do have their flaws, but we shouldn't assume that all of them are the same. Feingold is a plain-spoken, down-to-earth, progressive guy. What is wrong with that?

[UrbScotty]

45. AND you could say it took fraud for Kerry to lose. (nt)

[Zero Division]

29. Senators have a better chance with no incumbent.

It'd be a great time for Russ to run. So far--if he does run, that is--he looks to be my number one choice for '08, followed by Clark, then Kerry.

I know governor's have a better chance in general, but I'm not really excited about any of the options so far in that category.

Russ seems like the most liberal of the potential candidates who can actually win an election.

[undeterred]

31. Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

RUSS IS FOR US~!

[deadparrot]

33. Would a being a blue state "Yankee" hurt him

as bad as it did Kerry?

Don't get me wrong, his policies are infinitely more favorable to me than Hillary's, and ideally, someone's geographic location shouldn't be a factor in determining their ability to lead, but the fact remains that Republican attack dogs will be out in full-force in three years...

[undeterred]

34. WI isn't really a blue state

Kerry took WI by less than 20000 votes. Its Madison and Milwaukee vs the rural areas, and its pretty evenly divided (4 Dems, 4 Reps in Congress). Feingold is from Janesville WI and I think that's a whole lot different than running someone from New England. No way could you make this guy a "political insider".

[deadparrot]

36. Yes, but

RoveCo gave John McCain an illegitimate biracial child in 2000. They can distort truths faster than I don't know what.

[safi0]

41. But you

Can basically say if Wisconsin so radically blue then why did Shrub sepnd so much time campaigning there.

[deadparrot]

42. If we had stand-up strategists, I would worry less.

But I've been dissappointed by the Democrats' weakness in responding to Republican attacks.

Basically, I'm scared that we'll never elect someone without a Southern accent ever again (no offense to Southern DUers).

[safi0]

43. I just think

That arguement would be incredibly weak. This is a state that Kerry won by the slimmest of slim margins, and I just think that argument would be weak

[UrbScotty]

46. They'll distort what ANY Dem says, will they not?

So... Why not nominate someone who can stand up for himself and for all of us against the Repub machine?

[deadparrot]

47. Suppose you're right...

after how they slammed Kerry because of what region he represents, I'm paranoid.

[cascadiance]

49. How could such a "blue" state elect a fascist like Sensenbrenner?

I know he's a congress critter and for a certain district that's likely more red than blue, but it still shows that Wisconsin isn't "pure blue"...

[undeterred]

39. kick!

:kick: :kick: :kick: :kick: :kick: :kick: :kick: :kick:

[IndianaGreen]

44. I voted Yes on this poll

Feingold is a maverick, but he is a very principled guy so that even if one were to disagree with Russ on an issue, one cannot say that Russ is triangulating.

[eridani]

48. Yes

He'd at least represent progressive issues, and we'd get a chance to see if he could run a decent campaign.

[Norquist Nemesis]

50. The anti-Democrats will make an issue of it because

it's an easy target. Divorce, or no wife...ready, aim, fire!

Anyone remember how Dean's wife was made a target because she would choose to stay home and continue her practice? I first heard the criticism while flipping through the radio channels in the car while looking for something other than The FISH and 'Conservative Talk'. I stumbled on Savage. :puke: :puke: :puke: (It was the first time I'd heard him and wish I could take back those few minutes of my life!)

Savage was ranting on how Dean's wife thinks her practice is more important than her marriage. :wtf: It must be true or why wasn't she out there campaigning with him? And how's she going to handle the State Dinners from her practice in Vermont? She needs to step to the plate and show that her marriage and this country is more important than her selfish needs! On and on.

Within a week, it was all over the airwaves. And within a few more days, the Drs. Dean were on primetime TV doing a fireside chat with Bawbwa or some other 'well known' interviewer. Really pissed me off the way the noise machine took another non-issue and made it into a fucking culture war false choice!