Feingold for President?

[IndianaGreen]

Russ Feingold voted against PATRIOT and IWR, and he is a maverick, a Democratic version of John McCain.

Published on Thursday, December 16, 2004 by The Nation
Feingold for President?
by John Nichols

The crowd at the Vernon County Democratic Party's annual dinner was large, loud and longing for a little partisan passion.
Far from being beat down by the November presidential election result, the 100 rural Democrats who gathered in Viroqua Tuesday night were ready to fight against the war in Iraq, against economic policies that favor big business over working people and family farmers, and against the warping of the public discourse by a media that is more concerned about Scott Peterson's conviction than the future of Social Security.

Unfortunately, they don't see many reflections of their grass-roots passion in the state or national Democratic Party leadership. In fact, when Ed Garvey and I met with the Vernon County activists - most of whom were Democrats but some of whom were interested Greens and independents - the response to our suggestion that in this era of conservative hegemony Wisconsin and the United States need an opposition party was immediate and enthusiastic.

They even had a suggestion for who the opposition leader should be. When I was describing what a serious opposition party would stand for at this moment in history - starting with an absolute rejection of the war in Iraq and empire building and going on to a passionate defense of civil liberties and a willingness to stand up to multinational corporations - a bearded fellow in the crowd shouted, "We've got someone who can do it - the only senator who voted against the Patriot Act: Russ Feingold." The crowd cheered.

And they aren't alone.

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1216-24.htm

[itzamirakul]

1. Shades of the DLC...n/t

[IndianaGreen]

2. DLC and its clones in Congress voted for the war and for PATRIOT

The DLC is now trying to divert attention from their own role in the 2004 fiasco and pushing for Democrats to move further right, even to the point of adopting the language of the Religious Right.

[rodeodance]

3. a tad bit of shade but not much!!

I am proud to say he is my Senator--an honest caring Senator to boot!!

[itzamirakul]

7. Yeah, well Hillary is my Senator and

although I am proud of her and voted for her in the Senate race, I would NOT vote for her to be President - no matter how much the GOP guesses that Democrats will do. She has a shade too much of the DLC on her as well.

[American Tragedy]

6. I don't know what you're talking about

If you think Russ Feingold is too DLC, then you're gonna have one hell of a time finding a viable candidate.

[Radical Activist]

9. Are you kidding?

He's far more liberal than Howard "I hate the DLC" Dean. You don't really think Feingold is the least bit DLC do you? Give some proof if you do.

[Tinoire]

27. Ouch Itzamirakul, that's incorrect. Feingold has always been anti-DLC

Feingold is not, nor has he ever been, listed as part of the New Dem Coalition (you can search here : http://www.ndol.org/new_dem_dir_action.cfm)

Feingold openly LOATHES the DLC.

Russ Feingold interview
by Matthew Rothschild
The Progressive magazine, May 2002 ((notice the date is 2002 before it was 'fashionable' to hate the DLC))

(snip)

Feingold was first elected to the U.S. Senate in 1992 after sneaking through as the lesser-known candidate in a tight three-way Democratic primary. In 1998, he barely won reelection after he refused to accept soft money.

I asked him about his Presidential aspirations, as well as campaign finance, the conservative drift of the Democratic Party, and the raging conflict in the Middle East.

(snip)

Q: But you seem to be putting a toe in with your travels to campuses and to important primary states.

Feingold: That wasn't the reason I did it. I was asked by students from Brown University when I spoke there. They said we really like what you're doing, and we'd like you to run for President, but in any event would you be willing to go to some larger campuses and speak? And I said yes. I find that exciting, because I find that students are very strong on my issues, stronger than anyone: anti-death penalty, anti-racial profiling, campaign finance reform, questioning the anti-terrorism bill. And what I did do was to indicate that I want to see a more progressive Democratic ticket. I'm not happy with the Democratic Leadership Council's dominance of the party. And although I'm unlikely to be the person, I want Wisconsin's progressivism to influence the ticket. And we'll do better as a party if we do. We'll have more energy. We'll have a broader tent.

Q: Why is the DLC dominating?

Feingold: I think it's because the Democratic Party decided that corporatizing was a way to help with fundraising, especially in an era of soft money. It allowed the Democratic Party, in their view, to blunt some of the issues, like trade, that were causing problems with, frankly, the larger moneyed interests. And the ultimate example of that was the coronation of Gore in Los Angeles. That convention was a corporate trade show. It was nothing like the Democratic conventions of the past. So I see the DLC as, to some extent, taking the soul away from the Democratic Party. And I see the DLC as having sold American workers down the river. I oppose GATT, and NAFTA, and all the things Clinton and Gore were for. When we lose our commitment to opposing something as manifestly wrong as the death penalty, I'm very uncomfortable with that.

Q: Can a progressive get the nomination?

Feingold: I think so. What it would require is somebody who had a lot of students and young people involved, traditional progressives, labor people, women. There is a coalition there. I think it can happen. The conventional wisdom is that you'll do well in Iowa and New Hampshire, but then you're going to get it somewhere else. That's not what I felt in North Carolina. That's not what I felt in Texas in Austin. That's not what I felt in Michigan in Ann Arbor. And I know those are the more liberal parts. But let's face it: Those are the places that have a lot of influence in the primaries. So I think it's untrue that a genuinely progressive candidate couldn't win the nomination. It would depend in part on whether labor leaders decided they had to go with the DLC candidate or if they'll fight for their members and go with someone who has a more progressive trade policy.
This is a time of great anxiety, and that's tragic. But it means it's a time of real political change that can, in theory, occur. And we should seize the moment.

Q: Many progressive issues are popular ones, like the minimum wage and health care.

Feingold: I do think there would be a receptivity to somebody who campaigned in a straightforward, cohesive way, supporting an increase in the minimum wage, being for universal health care for all Americans, and opposing trade agreements like NAFTA.

(snip)

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Politicians/Russ_Feingold.html

GO RUSS! :bounce: And you have ACTION to back up your words!

"I'm worried sick about what's going to happen with Supreme Court nominations, trade policy, the environment, if we get eight years of Bush," says the Wisconsin Democrat. "But I'm also worried about the prospect that we could have four years of Bush and then four years of a DLC Democrat."

Russ Feingold

"If we are criticizing Ralph Nader and Howard Dean, then we are criticizing our own failures," he said. "The party should get out of the clutches of the DLC. This is the Democratic Party that took soft money, that sold jobs down the river."

Russ Feingold, 2004


"Look ahead to what this means," contends Feingold. "What this means is that you will never have anyone in the Cabinet with views that are outside the centrist mainstream in Washington. There will be a dumbing down in terms of having people who have ideals making policy."

Russ Feingold

[itzamirakul]

52. Ooops! Mea Culpa!

I must have gained too much of a distaste for those in the beltway and become overly suspicious.

I stand beautifully corrected. Thank you for the great references.

Now, I will immediately go whip myself with a wet noodle.:)

[Tinoire]

67. LMAO!

but you already knew I love your humor lol

Not to worry, had another good poster tell us that Kucinich was PNAC/AEI/NAI/DLC tonight. Said he picked that up in a long tread fill of references. OUCH!.... Made me realize that some of us are going to have to work at shortening our threads ;)

[w4rma]

29. Are you flipping nuts, itzamirakul? (nt)

[latteromden]

39. The DLC?! I think we're talking about two different senators here! (n/t)

[Zynx]

51. HA! I almost exploded in laughter.

You are officially out of touch with the outside world.

[dolo amber]

4. I'm down with that!

:bounce:

[American Tragedy]

5. Now there is somebody for whom I would really fight!!!

God, I would love it if he would run. Russ Feingold is probably my favorite surviving member in the Congress. When I took the political quiz, he was the Senator with whom I was most closely matched.

I know for a fact that my Green, Libertarian, and independent friends would vote for him in a second.

We could also consider Wisconsin ours without too much of a struggle this time, thus allocating resources to other states.

[iamjoy]

54. What Political Quiz?

Link please.

[Radical Activist]

8. McCain - Feingold

Could become a Presidential match up and not just a well known bill in Congress.

Although that bill had everything that might have made a difference taken out of it before it became law. Completely useless.

[stray cat]

10. Feingold in 2008

Feingold is an independent thinker and a man of the people. He is exactly what we need in a candidate: an experienced politician who doesn't think, act or talk like a politician. Unlike other senators he reads bills before he signs them and that is why he voted against the patriot act.

He is a well spoken and wise maverick who I would be proud to have as my president!

[berry]

11. A VERY good idea!

It's good news that Feingold is possibly open to the idea of running. I can't think of anyone I would rather support. And I do think he could win.

[kamqute]

12. Best Senator we've got

[kamqute]

13. Oh yeah but he's a JEW AAHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[IndianaGreen]

15. But he is not a Holy Joe, or a Paul Wolfowitz, or a Dan Senor, or a Feith

He is not a Likudnik like the neocons I mentioned before!

[njdemocrat106]

18. He'd be good to break the WASP stronghold of the presidency

but of course the right-wing hicks would hate him just because of that. I personally like the sounds of a Clark/Warner ticket in 2008.

[FrenchieCat]

25. Me too njdemocrat106....

That ticket you mentioned sounds...."just right".

I like Feingold...but have sworn off of senators as candidates. period.

WES CLARK
"RED DOG" DEMOCRAT IN '08

Won't take any Sh*t, AND...will kick ass in Red States

[ProudDad]

89. I won't vote for any more war-mongers

No more, no how, no way.

[Tinoire]

31. Do you have a problem with Jews?

If so, you're on the wrong board.

[iamjoy]

55. But Can A Jew Win

I have no problem with Jews (I am one).

But can a Jew win in the South and other Red States?

I think they might. If Thomas Frank was on to anything in his "What's The Matter With Kansas..." book people in the midwest (and South) are frustrated with the "atheism" of the "liberals" and somehow see Democrats as "the establishment" for their pandering to Hollywood.

Now, because he is Jewish, his religion is sure to come up and he will have to talk about it. True, it could backfire like Kerry's Catholism. And there are a number of people who just won't vote for some one they think is going to hell, but I doubt we could win them anyway.

And, because he is a bit of a maverick, eschewing soft money, he is able to fight the "establishment" label.

Of course, the DLC, etc will probably find a way to ruin him, just like they did Dean. And Senators have a tough time winning the Presidency because they aren't seen as leaders.

[IndianaGreen]

56. Can even Jesus win "in the South and other Red States?"

Jesus could not win in Jesusland if he was running for President today! The Jesus of the RW is a man-made creation of the Religious Right's propaganda machine. When was the last time you heard the likes of Dobson, Falwell, or Robertson rail against the rich for their exploitation of the poor, as the historical Jesus always did? Instead you hear these modern "Teachers of the Law" rail against homosexuals, which is something the historical Jesus never did!

I live in a red state and I will bust my ass to get someone like Feingold elected President, for he represents my values better than the sort of characters preferred by the DLC.

[Tinoire]

65. I think that

White Jewish male, White Gentile male can both pass this election.

I hate this but it's too early for a female Dem or a Black to carry it. Asians, Arabs might as well not even apply because of rotten unfairness.

But Jewish? Let's be very blunt. No one cares if someone is Jewish anymore- not among the majority of Dems. Send in a Jewish man progressive like Wellstone, Feingold who has a proven sense of fairness over I/P and he won't have a darn problem. The problem, in progressive circles would be with anyone deemed to be an Israel-firster. Lieberman immediately springs to mind. No Israel-firsters, no neo-Liberals (and both apply regardless of religion) and I totally believe that either a Jewish or Gentile male can take this one. Just please, not that disgraceful scene we had last year where they all rushed at break-neck speed to AIPAC to present their credentials. Frankly, I was expecting Sharption to whip out an Ethiopian Jewish grand-mother at any moment.

The kind of people who can't stomache a Jew for President need to get their little ass out of the party so that we can work on re-attracting a lot of the people who left the party because of all that dead lumber.

Do you really think Kerry's Catholicism back-fired? I really don't.

All that of course, is just my opinion but I know many, many more like me :)

On edit: And please, everybody, whatever candidate we have must be prepared for: http://video.buzzflash.com/04/10/ItsHardWork.wmv

[ProudDad]

88. He'd only need one

Ohio

[kamqute]

14. Kucinich-McKinney!

[dolstein]

16. Sure, let's really shoot for losing all 50 states

We didn't quite get there with George McGovern and Walter Mondale. But hey, Feingold just might be able to accomplish what they couldn't.

[NEDem]

17. LOL

Sad thing is you're right.

[zacho]

19. He'd do fairly well

I can't quite gauge his electability but I'd expect him to earn 45%+ of the vote.

I wouldn't vote for him in the NH primary if I didn't have confidence that he is electable.

Even if he loses he'd be our own Barry Goldwater and that would be useful.

[JI7]

20. he voted with the Republicans on the gun control bills that came up

Kerry left campaigning to go back to the Senate to vote FOR gun control.

[IndianaGreen]

21. Democrats need to rethink their knee jerk opposition to gun rights

It is a loser! It is why many people in places like Kettle, KY, vote for the GOP despite the fact they agree with Dems on economic issues. Don't mess with people's dogs or guns!

Considering who is running the country, one would think and hope that many gunphobics would get a dose of reality and arm themselves, as I certainly recommend to everyone I know.

[fujiyama]

22. In all honesty

I don't think he'd do that bad.

He's a maverick senator and while he leans to the left, he's managed to get himself reelected two times in Wisconsin, a swing state that has recently trended republican. Remember, he got reelected this time by 10% (compared to Kerry taking the state by 1%), getting the most votes of any statewide office this election.

Sure, the republicans would smear him on his vote against the PATRIOT Act, but the fact is that it did take courage to do what he did. The people of Wisconsin realized that.

I think Fiengold would appeal to people all over the northeast and the great lakes states as well. He'd keep WI blue and likely take MI.

Also he listened to his constituents on gun control and eventually voted against the assult weapons renewal. His moderate stance on gun control would be a plus IMO.

He has a rare sincerity that most politicians lack. His populist stance on NAFTA and trade wouldn't hurt.

[latteromden]

40. I dunno about ALL the Great Lakes states. Minnesota, voting for a Packers

fan? I just don't know about that.

:P

[iwantmycountryback]

23. You're kidding right

Feingold is one of the few true Democrats we have left. He's an independent thinker that stands up for true Democratic values, and his margin of victory in his senate was 12% I think, while Kerry won by about 12,000 votes. That's completely ignorant to think Feingold would not win a state.

[Senator Lamb]

24. if he runs

its a tie between Clark for who my guy is.

[fujiyama]

43. It would be hard to chose wouldn't it?

Better yet, have them both on the same ticket. That would be cool.

[w4rma]

30. Hey dolstein. Sen. Feingold won his seat by 12% this year. Kerry's was 2%

in Feingold's state.

Why? Because he voted against gun control and he voted against the PATRIOT ACT and he voted against the IWR and he voted against NAFTA and people trust him because he is, quite possibly, the most honest U.S. Senator today.

Every single one of those positions that Feingold holds is also held by a majority of Americans. His positions are in the majority and his anti-authoritarian, civil-libertarian positions have strong appeal across party lines.

[latteromden]

37. 2%? It was .4%, actually. Feingold is a member of that miniscule group of

politicians, the honest, principled ones. I can't help but think of Wellstone when I hear him talk.

[Tinoire]

33. Yep. He sure could. Good analysis here of how and why

If you want to know what's wrong with the Democratic Party and why it lost this election, compare the stories of Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis) and Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry

Silver Linings Dept.: Russ Feingold Shows Dems the Way to 2008
by Dave Lindorff
04 Nov 2004

(snip)

Feingold, who himself only narrowly won re-election in Wisconsin six years ago, swept to victory on Tuesday against Republican Tim Michels, winning 55-44 percent.

(snip)

While Kerry’s timid Republican-lite, pro-war, pro-free trade campaign was a loser, progressive Sen. Russ Feingold, running against the war, against the Patriot Act, and against NAFTA, trounced his opponent to win a third term in bellweather Wisconsin, showing Democrats what they need to do to win next time.

(snip)

In contrast, Feingold was the lone person in the Senate to vote against the war authorization and the PATRIOT Act. He also, in his re-election campaign, condemned NAFTA and other trade pacts as unfair to American workers.

According to the conservative pro-corporate Democratic Leadership Council, of which candidate Kerry is a charter member, and to the candidate's now discredited campaign staff, Feingold's positions were "out of touch" with the American mainstream. The DLC is now trying to blame Kerry's disastrous loss of the 2004 election on everything from Karl Rove's success in making gay marriage a key issue in swing states to Americans having succumbed to Bush's scare tactics.

Feingold's strong win suggests another more likely possibility: Kerry wasn’t progressive enough. If Feingold, in the heartland state of Wisconsin, could make opposition to the war and the PATRIOT Act a campaign asset, if he could attract working class votes by condemning the trade pacts that allow American companies to shift not just white collar jobs but entire plants overseas and then import the goods they used to make in America back in tax free, then Kerry could have done the same thing in Ohio, Florida, New Mexico and the other swing states he lost by running a timid Republican-lite campaign.

(snip)


The lesson is clear. As long as the Democratic Party remains in the hands of the DLC party hacks, as long as Democratic primary voters allow themselves to fall for the argument that progressive politics are a losing proposition, the Republicans will keep winning more and more elections.

http://www.thiscantbehappening.net/id8.html

Congratualation Russ!!!! :toast:

[blackangrydem]

26. He is famous for one thing: Campain Finance Reform,

and it didn't work. 527s are the monster that he and McCain created.

[JI7]

28. he voted against the patriot act and IWR

he also voted with the Republicans on some gun bills.

[Hippo_Tron]

64. McCain-Feingold was to get the idea in the door

Feingold and a lot of democrats, including Kerry, support publicly funded electins.

[Paulie]

32. I'm still mad about the Ashcroft vote

http://cnnstudentnews.cnn.com/2001/fyi/news/01/31/cabinet.confirmation/

Lots of "rights" don't always make up for some serious "wrongs".

POE ;)

[latteromden]

34. Who knew Ashcroft would be SO terrible? I mean, sure, he was obviously

a conservative Republican, but nobody thought that he would be nearly as terrible on civil liberties as he has been. We didn't know. Russ couldn't have known.

[Tinoire]

35. It bothered me too until I understood his reasoning.

Ashcroft in all honesty was a kook with endearing qualities like siging off tune and covering up naked statues.

The votes for Ashcroft pale in comparison to the votes for Gonzalez.

=== anyway here's his reasoning:

(snip)

Why would Feingold, the progressive, pro-choice, pro-civil-rights, anti-death-penalty Senator, stand up for Ashcroft's confirmation? And what does Feingold's bipartisan gesture say about the Democratic Party as a whole?

(snip)

"I believe we have to hold the line and not use ideology alone in making decisions about cabinet appointments," Feingold says. Otherwise, "I fear if we keep going, more and more areas of our government are going to fall into the Great Divide and be engulfed in a culture war."

Liberals could not be confirmed, either, if Republican Senators applied an ideological litmus test. By offering what he calls "an olive branch" to the Republicans, Feingold says he is setting precedent for a progressive administration of the future.

(snip)

Feingold knows that many of his Democratic constituents were upset with his vote. Especially in the urban areas of his state, Feingold says, "there were lots of people who were confused and hurt, not understanding why I would vote the way I did until I explained it to them." But he notes that in his "listening sessions" around the rest of Wisconsin, "many people were glad I took an independent stand."

"Independent" is the key word here.

(snip)

Russ Feingold does not fit that model, however. Not only is he a progressive, Midwestern Democrat, he justifies his vote for Ashcroft precisely because he opposes the centrist drift of the Democratic Party. If Ashcroft could be blocked on ideological grounds, he argues, so could progressives like Ramsey Clark or Ted Kennedy, whose values are left of center on issues like the death penalty.

(snip)

http://www.progressive.org/conn0301.html

[latteromden]

38. It'll take me a while to build up the sort of trust for Feingold that I

had for Kerry (for example, when I was looking up examples of his "flip-flopping," I knew I wouldn't find many unreasonable ones and I'd find quite constant positions, actually, and I knew I would find good explanations for seemingly non-Kerry-like Senate votes - and I did), but I think it'll happen. He doesn't seem to have many votes that he can't explain, if any.

[Tinoire]

42. You're a good person Latteromden. n/t

[Placebo]

36. I would be thrilled, Thrilled, THRILLED TO SUPPORT FEINGOLD!

Which is probably why it will never happen. :(

[latteromden]

41. Well, I've already posted 5 times in this thread, so it's safe to suggest

that I would be incredibly proud to cast my first vote for Russ Feingold. I haven't heard a better suggestion for 2008, and I suspect I won't. He would be very good. Strong, consistent, progressive, a pretty good debater, if I do say so myself. I'D campaign for 'im.

[Tinoire]

45. Your first vote?

WELCOME again :toast:

I only wish my first vote could have been for someone as FINE as Feingold. Here's wishing you a first vote you can be incredibly proud of your entire life :toast: and here's wishing to a brighter future for your generation :toast:

[fujiyama]

44. The idea

of voting for someone so principled and honest brings a big smile to my face.

I would be very proud to vote for somelike like Russ.

[Tinoire]

46. I feel the same! Run Russ RUN!

Let us start working for you NOW!

[latteromden]

48. *discreetly prints out "Draft Russ" t-shirt* *cough* ;) (n/t)

[IndianaGreen]

61. Let's rally around Feingold before we are told Hillary is the Messiah

or that "Mister Electable" deserves another shot at another Bush.

[Tinoire]

63. I was JUST now thinking the EXACT SAME thing before opening

this thread.

It would be terrific for us to unite around a candidate the majority here can support on the issues now. IF we could do that, we should close ranks right now and build him up.

Forget Dean, forget Kucinich, forget Clark, forget all the ones over whom we split last election and unite NOW not allowing slick campaign operatives to disunite us.

You well saw what happened last year when 1. Dean stepped in and a slew, now 99% gone, of obnoxious campaign brats invaded and then, while we were still reeling from that 2. the Clark campaign operatives, also now 99% gone, moved in with the stealth of a herd of Jumanji elephants and turned this site into a circus until after the Primaries were settling.

It's now that we all should, if we could, compromise a little on a man that most of us like and trust and start working for him in an organized, non-disruptive manner. This is a grass-roots site built that was built up by grass-roots activists and not the party establishment. We can't allow them to infiltrate and disrupt our efforts like they did last time.

Frankly though, I don't think we have the right tools in place to do that. Until the day we learn when to close the door to the big tent in time, they'll keep splitting us up.

No offense meant to the Clark and Dean supporters presently on this board. I used those as an example because their manouverings were the most obvious and the most disruptive at the time. We had barely gotten over the Dean stampede, when the Clark stampede took place & neither one even appeared spontaneous. And of course the Kerry camp played it very quietly, sending in stealth operatives most of whom are gone also. Never again.

If people are willing to rally around the most reasonably acceptable candidate now, I'm game. I'll forget about waiting for my ideal, manufactured or otherwise, to show up & support someone most of us can 'compromise' on now. BEFORE THE DLC & DNC send us their campaign operatives.

[FrenchieCat]

68. Forget Clark? Don't think so...

But I can always look at a candidate's platform and viability and strength and weaknesses for an assessement of how he might fare in the General Election in beating the Republicans.

I look at what issues were key in the '04 elections and ask myself whether this candidate would be able to answer some of the same questions asked from the candidates this time round.....

Those issues rated by voters in order of importance:
Terrorism and War in Iraq
Social Values
Jobs

[Tinoire]

72. The reason I said that is because

he's never going to appeal to a very determined and committed segment. Them there are just the facts of life. There the facts the people like Kucinich are going to have to deal with to. So rather than brow-beating each other and having another train wreck, imo, it would be wiser to settle on someone who the majority of us already know represents our core values so that we don't end up making a bigger compromise later. You know that fact as well as I do and you know very well that there is a very strong group to whom you will never sell the war in Yugoslavia, SOA or a gentler form of imperialism. Most of that group caved in this time and voted for Kerry. I highly, highly doubt it will do it again. Realistically, you have two choices- join up with that part of the Left now or stick to your guns and gamble on trying to sell him again relying heavily on that elusive swing vote to make up the shortfall.

The first issue you noted was terrorism. Already you lost the big faction that isn't concerned with terrorism and that is very turned off by that militarism so reminiscent of Israeli politics.

Them there Frenchie are the facts as I see them, as many people like me see them and we're not going to budge- not unless Clark totally metamorphoses over the next 3 years and can magically dump what we consider some disturbing baggage. So who are you going to bank on for the vote? The swing voters that never materialize or that Left faction that is with you on most issues except terror/war/imperialism? I have no doubt that Clark is a brilliant man and even a good man but on those issues I mentioned there's no compromise for too many of us. Don't think there aren't many things about Clark I don't like. He makes a LOT of sense on some other issues that are important to me but you'll never get me to overlook the one the ones I mentioned.

I admire your dedication to Clark, I'll keep reading about him with interest & as open a mind as possible but you need to bear in mind for 2008 that names like Sam Nunn and Brezhinski, which so many Clark supporters defended last time, are anathema to some of us. We're not all going to get our ideal candidate... I think it's time to accept that, examine the values that bind us together on this site, in this party and compromise now. I hope I was able to make my point without offending you or attacking Clark because that wasn't my intention at all.

he's never going to appeal to a very determined and committed segment. Them there are just the facts of life. There the facts the people like Kucinich are going to have to deal with to. So rather than brow-beating each other and having another train wreck, imo, it would be wiser to settle on someone who the majority of us already know represents our core values so that we don't end up making a bigger compromise later. You know that fact as well as I do and you know very well that there is a very strong group to whom you will never sell the war in Yugoslavia, SOA or a gentler form of imperialism. Most of that group caved in this time and voted for Kerry. I highly, highly doubt it will do it again. Realistically, you have two choices- join up with that part of the Left now or stick to your guns and gamble on trying to sell him again relying heavily on that elusive swing vote to make up the shortfall.

The first issue you noted was terrorism. Already you lost the big faction that isn't concerned with terrorism and that is very turned off by that militarism so reminiscent of Israeli politics.

Them there Frenchie are the facts as I see them, as many people like me see them and we're not going to budge- not unless Clark totally metamorphoses over the next 3 years and can magically dump what we consider some disturbing baggage. So who are you going to bank on for the vote? The swing voters that never materialize or that Left faction that is with you on most issues except terror/war/imperialism? I have no doubt that Clark is a brilliant man and even a good man but on those issues I mentioned there's no compromise for too many of us. Don't think there aren't many things about Clark I don't like. He makes a LOT of sense on some other issues that are important to me but you'll never get me to overlook the one the ones I mentioned.

If Clark is the man, well you still have 3 years to do it, to sell him but 1. do you even know if he's interested and 2. do you really believe that if you can just package him right I'll accept things like the war against Yugoslavia? You are going against people's core beliefs with that one & no matter how unfair you think it is, you'll never ever sell me on the idea that that war was for anything other than oil, pipelines and getting into Russia's backyard.

I really admire your dedication to Clark, I'll keep reading about him with interest & as open a mind as possible but please remember for 2008 that names like Sam Nunn, Brezhinski, SOA, which so many Clark supporters defended last time, are anathema to many of us. We're not all going to get our ideal candidate... I think it's time to accept that, examine the values that bind us together on this site, in this party and compromise now.

IMO, we as the grassroots, need to stop looking "at a candidate's platform and viability and strength and weaknesses for an assessement of how he might fare in the General Election in beating the Republicans" and pay more attention to who best represents the core issues that unify us because from there, I believe, beating the Republicans will come naturally.

The way I see it, we as the grass roots should select our candidate and let the darn DLC worry about beating the Republicans. For the last 2 elections, it's been the reverse- they picked that candidate and then told us to go beat the Republicans- then turned around and accused us of not having put enough passion into it. Feingold isn't necessarily my ideal but he'll do very well and I'm noticing Moderates and the "extreme Left" (or whatever we're called these days) rallying behind him. Could he do for you?

[FrenchieCat]

73. Your post was somewhat confusing....but then I realized

That you double posted most of it.

I feel like the statement you posted is part of the problem with this party.....

"we as the grassroots, need to stop looking "at a candidate's platform and viability and strength and weaknesses for an assessement of how he might fare in the General Election in beating the Republicans" and pay more attention to who best represents the core issues that unify us because from there, I believe, beating the Republicans will come naturally.

Natural occurrences will win an election; no strategic plan needed to win over the majority of voters? That sounds so naive.

Problem in the last election was that when the media first pushed Dean upfront...the media never discussed strategy in winning the general election....instead they concentrated solely on strategies to win a Democratic primaries.

Once Iowa and NH voters gave us John Kerry.....he, on his face appeared more "acceptable as electable" than Dean, but upon closer inspection Kerry was not the guy to strategically make the best case for Democrats to win the general election. Kerry's National Security experience was negligeable; his Vietnam baggage to heavy; his North England roots too patrician; his Senatorial background and Senate votes too controversial; and his charisma too lacking.

So you can think that Wes Clark was sold to this country....but he wasn't. In fact, a great majority in this country still have no idea who General Clark is...and many more don't know what he represents and what his policies are. Clark just wasn't exposed to the general voting public in the way that Kerry, Edwards and Dean were.

So just cause some of the extreme lefties (and yes....just some) didn't prefer Clark to Kucinich (who sold out to Edward--Mr. IWR Co-Sponsor).....that has nothing to do with why Clark didn't do as well as he could have, had he been provided with the same kind of publicity that Dean was given before and Kerry and Edwards were given following Iowa. It's not like Dean or Kucinich swept the primaries...with their Politically Correct lefty stance on certain issues that pleased this small but "determined and committed" group that you refer to.

Thank goodness that your words are just yours and a few who believe that they have more influence than they really do.

Again....we must strategize wisely to win the next general election (wisely is the key word here). The natural left course of things just ain't gonna get it.

[Tinoire]

74. My apologies for the double post

Lately I've had to type my suff on word before pasting because DU kicks me out (too many open DU windows?) and loses my posts...

I'm glad for you that you're not concerned about my words and are willing to disregard the "extreme Lefties" again. If there's one thing I've admired about certain Clark supporters, it's the ability to drown out anything they don't want to hear.

With that we can part politely. These are grounds I do not wish to visit with you because your main interest on this board is pushing Clark, not issues. Do you ever post anything or anywhere else? If I had a star right now, I'd do a quick search and provide that revealing ratio but I read enough of this board for it to be very obvious. You're a bright woman. It's too bad for all of us that you're stuck on that one trick.

Bye FrenchieCat. Good luck with your candidate. Good luck with trying to persuade everyone to see him the way you do.

[FrenchieCat]

75. Thank you

For your almost graceful post. Your attempt to end the conversation was very thoughful and clever, but I feel a need to respond to your characterization of me and my "Clark" posts. Needless to say, you have made assumptions based on one dimensional incomplete information....about me, this time.

What you do know:
I am an ardent Clark supporter foremost on this particular forum. Wes Clark energized me during the primaries, gave me hope, and I admire what he has accomplished in his life and his stance on policies and issues. I also believe that he could have and will, in the future, be a winner for Democrats. I want to see him as President, because I believe that he offers the kind of balance and wisdom that this country needs in these times. period.

What you don't know:
You are assuming that my political life starts and ends at DU. This is pretty simplistic and actually reflects more about you than about me.

DU is a virtual Internet site for which one can discuss whatever one chooses. Just because I don't show up in every thread that you participate in, does not make me a "one trick" pony. Go to the African American forum and read some of my posts there, for one. I think I mentioned Wes Clark once in my 30+ posts there (Forum just got started).

In addition, I am very involved in the REAL world of local activism via my church......one of the largest churches in the Bay Area (where my husband is a Deacon).....which is by the way, also Barbara Lee's church. Local politics and humanitarian projects dealing with the Black community is how I choose to participate in making a REAL difference. I am also participating in live actions by writing about my concerns regarding Haiti and Dafur to various publications and congresspersons. "Debating issues" at DU is not my #1 "pet project" but promoting General Clark on this forum is important to me....if you don't mind....because I think it serves a purpose in debunking misinformation put out about him by those who exaggerate, misrepresent and just interpret his intents in a dishonest slanted manner.

So I will take your disguised criticism and I will turn it on it's head by asking you what do you think I should be discussing and with whom? Then I will ask you what difference will that debate have on my children's future and those suffering Black folks all over the world? I believe that I am doing what I should.....just like I have to believe that you are too. So you see, You can typify me if you want.....but it doesn't make it so.

What's incredibly unfortunate is that you are coming off as patronizing, which I don't believe is your calculated intent. But since you have no real clue as to what I really represent, your superficial assumptions end up making you appear pretty presumptious.

On another note,I don't think that you appealing that we unite to promote a politician that is the "perfect" candidate for the extreme left is neither sensible nor rational. This strategy will not win a general election, in my view.

That's my take....and of course, you are welcome to yours.

[Tinoire]

79. You too. I am merely tired. Very tired. Very ashamed of my country

Very disgusted right now. And not wanting to spin any wheels.

My comment related to DU. Sincere impertinent word of advice- you want to help Clark here?- go out in non-Clark threads and express yourself. Show us who you are. Help change the opinion too many have formed of how Clark's most ardent supporters are here for only one reason.

Truly I am tired. Tsunami. Total catastrophe and not a word from his strongest advocates. Yet you would like us to accept your word for who he is. We don't even know who you are or what you really believe in. You may think this is criticism, a slam, whatever. It's nothing of the sort. I am plainly tired and disgusted right because of everything going on around us.

Thank you for filling me in on your personal activism & concerns which overlap many of mine. Let that show through your posts more Frenchie. Please. It will go a long ways towards showing us why we should respect your opinion, your moral/intellectual integrity etc & that's not a slam at you, not at all, it's that way for everyone here- regardless of who they support.

Sorry if this all sounds awkward.

As for your next to last sentence. Re-read our conversation. That wasn't what I was advocating at all. Feingold is not the perfect candidate for the "extreme Left". Read the Feingold threads here and elsewhere. He is getting support from a very wide range of people who have admired him over the years. Feingold is simply a candidate that the extreme Left, the Progressives and the Centrists are agreeing on. That combination to me sounds like a winner for the Democratic Party.

[FrenchieCat]

81. This does sound awkward.....

It's as though you are telling me what I should do. I don't recall feeling a need to do the same with you. Why? Because that is not my job.

Also know that my brother lives in Bangkok, and I have contributed monetarily to the rescue effort. Chit-chatting about this on DU serves no purpose for me....

It's too bad that you feel this need that I mirror your actions in order to "prove" myself to you. Frankly, I don't even see the need for these instructions you are doling out. It's a little bit sad to call oneself a "liberal".....but yet feel compeled to give directions to others on how they should comport themselves to meed your standard.

It's almost like the Twilight Zone....these posts.

Also know that Wes Clark and Wes Clark Jr. are both active in their own way in reference to the disaster, you feel that I should participate in.

Please note the following Clark quote in a recent WAPO article...and this interview from yesterday on CNBC in reference to the management of this disaster....from Wes Clark. He is considered very knowledgeable in the "Natural Disaster Management" arena.

Video of interview here: http://www.u-wes-a.com/mediaclips-post.html
just click on 12/29 Bullseyed interview.

Article snippet here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A32337-2004Dec28.html

Aid Grows Amid Remarks About President's Absence
By John F. Harris and Robin Wright
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, December 29, 2004; Page A01
<snip>
Retired Gen. Wesley K. Clark, who as the military's top European commander helped supervise NATO's efforts to respond to a 1999 earthquake in Turkey, said the United States has unique military capabilities in reconnaissance and logistics management that can be useful in the current crisis. He urged Bush to take a higher profile. "Natural disasters happen," Clark said. "One of the things people look for is a strong response that illustrates America's humanitarian values."
<snip to end>

[Quetzal]

47. I would be more than happy to cast my vote for Feingold

although his stance on voting for sanctions against Syria is disconcerting, he is ten times better than any other candidate I could think of.

[JI7]

49. what were his reasons

i would be interested to hear what he had to say.

[Tinoire]

57. Ditto to J17's question. Thanks n/t

[hfojvt]

50. gotta love Viroqua

but 100 does not sound like a "large" crowd, even for Vernon County. I am sure that I helped to put him in the Senate in 1992, but I cannot remember the primary, except for his ads "this is Russ Feingold, the underdog for the US Senate".
I cannot even think about 2008 right now, and I still think Hillary will be unstoppable. It is far more important for whoever is the candidate in 2008 to put more work into reclaiming Congress (if that does not get done in 2006.)

[erpowers]

53. I am happy

Since about a few days after this election I have been wanting Feingold to run for president in 2008. I think he will do a great job and will probably win. I really want him to run.

[TheFarseer]

58. And since he's a Jew we'd control all of the media and banking centers

come on! I'm just kidding!

[DrFunkenstein]

71. I'm Appalled

That someone would make an anti-PC joke at a liberal website where we are supposed to be bound and gagged by our need to be humorless wankers.

(for the record, there are hateful jokes (and words) that have no place, but this ain't one of them)

[bunkerbuster1]

82. Funny, I'd never even realized

sad thing is, it probably is sufficient to guarantee he'll never be nominated.

[American Tragedy]

59. kick

:kick:

[latteromden]

60. Kick, because this deserves it

[Hungy]

62. www.draftruss.com

Some people like the idea of a Feingold run, some don't. That's the way it's going to go.

However - if you're interested, check out http://www.draftruss.com

[fujiyama]

66. Awesome!

Thanks for the site link.

I was thinkin of starting a DU group for Russ Fiengold supporters. I'll start another thread on that.

I really don't care about "electability". I want someone principled and honest. I've heard him speak and he sounds genuine.

[IndianaGreen]

76. We need someone that shares the same core values as we do

and one that is enough of a maverick that even if we were to disagree with him on some issues, we would respect his intellectual honesty.

[Crunchy Frog]

80. I think that principled and honest are traits

that can translate into electability. I believe that voters respond to someone who has a clear set of principles and a willingness to stand up for them. I think that is more likely to be electable than something that's so "nuanced" that no one can tell what it actually stands for.

I hope you can get your group started. Also if you have any links to him speaking, I would be very interested in seeing them.

[ulysses]

69. count me in. n/t

[txaslftist]

70. Feingold for pres.... That's actually a ticket I could get behind...

with complete enthusiasm. I'm a bit leery about going with another senator, though. Too much crap to throw at him and the RWNM (right wing noise machine) is expert at hurling crap.

But then again, when it comes to electibility, I made that my criteria last time, and it didn't pan out. I'd rather just make my decision on who to send money to on principle, and electibility be damned.

Oooops. I sound like a...uh...Green.

[Crunchy Frog]

77. I would definitely support him for President

if Clark ends up not running. My first loyalty is to Clark, but at this point, Feingold is probably my second choice.

[fujiyama]

78. Clark is great

I would not have any problems supporting Clark either.

He was my first choice this time and I think he would make a strong candidate in '08 as well.

[PopulistDemocrat]

83. Is he against NAFTA?

And other corporate slave trade agreements?\


Or is he just like the Republicans?

[zulchzulu]

85. Against NAFTA, WTO...

Russ rules.

More...

# Voted NO on establishing a free trade agreement between US & Singapore. (Jul 2003)
# Voted NO on establishing a free trade agreement between the US and Chile. (Jul 2003)
# Voted NO on extending free trade to Andean nations. (May 2002)
# Voted NO on granting normal trade relations status to Vietnam. (Oct 2001)
# Voted NO on removing common goods from national security export rules. (Sep 2001)
# Voted NO on permanent normal trade relations with China. (Sep 2000)
# Voted NO on expanding trade to the third world. (May 2000)
# Voted NO on renewing 'fast track' presidential trade authority. (Nov 1997)
# Voted YES on imposing trade sanctions on Japan for closed market. (May 1995)
# Rated 25% by CATO, indicating a pro-fair trade voting record. (Dec 2002)

http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Russell_Feingold.htm

[PopulistDemocrat]

86. Sign me up, then.

[zulchzulu]

84. Like I've said before...I'd take a bullet for Russ

And like I've said before, America doesn't deserve Russ.

I remember being at the Madison WI Kerry HQ on Election Eve doing some database stuff and whatever else that was needed in the very busy main phone bank room and Sharon Stone came by the office and spoke to all of us. She was amazing. Graceful and witty and not a dry eye in the room when she was done speaking about the power of democracy.

After she was done, Russ came into the room to wish everyone all the luck we needed (WI went blue!) and spoke for a bit. I just so happened to be near the door when he came in and he gave the firmest handshake I've ever gotten and a hearty "thanks" for the efforts to get Kerry elected. Russ is one amazing human, let alone a Senator with a spine.

Lots of people ended up voting for Russ, including many Republicans that didn't really agree with him on most issues...they respected him for being a consistent and very intelligent American.

[PopulistDemocrat]

87. Feingold/Gephardt 2008

[Debs]

90. I'd Love to vote for Feingold

Unfortunatly, Me feeling that good about a candidate has been the kiss of death

[Lizzie Borden]

91. Feingold. My Senator.

I'd work my ass off!!!:kick: :kick: :kick:

[IndianaGreen]

94. We may not agree with all of the things Feingold has stood for, but...

We may not agree with all of the things Feingold has stood for, but Feingold has been so right on some many other issues, such as NAFTA, PATRIOT Act, and Iraq War Resolution that on the whole he is someone we can all rally around. Feingold can attract the same across the board coalition that Dean did before the Iowa fiasco, and he has no Vietnam ghosts waiting to surface whenever he runs for higher office.

Progressives and like-minded moderates must find a candidate that shares the same passion for our core values. The alternative is to wait for Al From and his DLC pukes to dictate to us another slate of "electable" candidates that we must swallow. Do you want a repeat of 2004?

[nascarblue]

92. Most definitely, he's the only one that has a sack

[ever_green]

93. I think he's great. He would have my vote.

He's probably too great to be President though, might get assasinated for his principles as do so many great leaders.