Senator Russ Feingold Will Not Seek The Presidency

I heard the depressing news a couple of hours ago. As much as I have grown to love my life in Philadelphia, and as much as I love the work I have been able to do for the movement as a whole, if the news been in the other direction, and had I been asked to help out, I'm about 99% sure I would have boarded a plane to Wisconsin on Monday morning. But, 'twas not to be.

In 2008, I hope that there is at least one candidate who can not only articulate a progressive vision for America, but who can also lead America toward progressive positions in the way Senator Russ Feingold has done for over a decade now. Grassroots politics. Campaign finance reform. Never sacrificing our civil liberties. Knowing when it is time to stop asking American soldiers to die for administration mistakes. Time and time again, Senator Feingold has led on issues that once seemed marginal, and brought them to majority status nationwide. Only a few living Democrats can say that on one issue, much less several. The more Senators we have like Senator Feingold, the better off we will all be as both progressives and as Americans. Even if he will not become President, he will always be a progressive leader.

On a personal level, I made my decision to support Senator Feingold for President on November 3rd, 2004, as I watched Kerry give his concession speech. Needless to say, given how long I was a Feingold supporter, my list of backup preferences is, um, not very well defined. Since I don't want to work on anyone's campaign simply for the sake of working on a presidential campaign, I won't be working on any presidential campaigns this cycle. So, it looks like you are stuck with me for another two years. I will be working for the movement, both here and with BlogPac,a nd I will continue to love life in Philadelphia.

Senator Feingold's statement can be found in the extended entry.

Dear Friends and Supporters,

On Sunday, November 12th in Racine, I will hold my 1000th Listening Session with the people of Wisconsin. Before reaching that milestone, I want you to know that I've decided to continue my role as Wisconsin's Junior Senator in the U.S. Senate and not to seek the Democratic nomination for President in 2008.

Like many Americans, I am excited by the results of the November 7th election. My fourteen years in the Senate have been the greatest privilege of my life and I am extremely pleased with what we have accomplished. During so much of that time, however, we Democrats have not only been in the minority but have often been so deeply mired there that my role has often been to block bad ideas or to simply dissent. That is a very important role but I relish the thought that in this new Congress we can start, not only to undo much of the damage that one-party rule has done to America, we can actually advance progressive solutions to such major issues as guaranteed healthcare, dependence on oil, and our unbalanced trade policies. The Senate of the 110th Congress could also well be a place of greater bi-partisan opportunities for change; something I am very proud to have been effective at in both Republican and Democratic Senates.

I hope all of you know how much I have appreciated the incredible response you have given me and the efforts of our Progressive Patriots Fund since January, 2005. In addition to all of our work in Wisconsin and D.C., I have traveled to seventeen states trying to promote the election of progressive Democrats in all states. At every stop from Birmingham, Alabama to Burlington, Vermont, to Ft. Dodge, Iowa, to Las Vegas, Nevada, people have agreed with my view that we need to stand up for a strong, principled Democratic party that is willing to replace timidity with taking the risks of promoting a platform of bold solutions to our nation's problems. Unfailingly, people responded well to my positions: opposition to the Iraq war; calling for a timeline to redeploy our troops from Iraq so we can focus on those who attacked us on September 11th, 2001; my opposition to the flawed provisions of the USA Patriot Act that threaten the freedoms of law-abiding Americans; my call for accountability for the Administration's arrogant disregard for the law especially with regard to illegal wiretapping; fighting for fiscal responsibility including tough common sense budget rules that will help end the reckless policies that have heaped a mountain of debt on our children and grandchildren; as well as my strong belief in guaranteed healthcare for all Americans and substantial investment in alternative energy sources and technologies.

Yet, while I've certainly enjoyed the repeated comments or buttons saying, "Run Russ Run", or "Russ in `08'", I often felt that if a piece of Wisconsin swiss cheese had taken the same positions I've taken, it would have elicited the same standing ovations. This is because the hunger for progressive change we feel is obviously not about me but about the desire for a genuinely different Democratic Party that is ready to begin to reverse the 25 years of growing extremism we have endured.

I'm sure a campaign for President would have been a great adventure and helpful in advancing a progressive agenda. At this time, however, I believe I can best advance that progressive agenda as a Senator with significant seniority in the new Senate serving on the Foreign Relations, Intelligence, Judiciary and Budget Committees. Although I have given it a lot of thought, I cannot muster the same enthusiasm for a race for President while I am trying simultaneously to advance our agenda in the Senate. In other words, if I really wanted to run for President, regardless of the odds or other possible candidates, I would do so. However, to put my family and all of my friends and supporters through such a process without having a very strong desire to run, seems inappropriate to me. And, yes, while I would strongly prefer that our nominee in 2008 be someone who had the judgment to oppose the Iraq war from the beginning, I am prepared to work as hard as I can through the Progressive Patriots Fund, and consistent with my duties in the Senate, to maintain or increase our gains from November 7 in the Congress and, of course, to elect a Democrat as President in 2008.

Most important, I want to continue my work as a Senator from this wonderful State of Wisconsin. Our fourteen year ongoing conversation that has taken place in hundreds of communities in Wisconsin in the form of open Listening Sessions is the principal reason I have been perceived as "ahead of the curve" on many key issues. Simply listening to the reasoning and passions of Wisconsinites remains the best source of good ideas and common sense I've ever encountered.

I love this country very much and am so lucky to be able to serve it in the United States Senate. My heartfelt thanks to all of you for your support and encouragement.

Sincerely,
Russ Feingold Middleton, Wisconsin

Display:


Feingold (none / 0)

It shocked me especially with how much support he had from the bloggers.  But I know it feels.  I wanted Gore in 2004.


The Kentucky Democrat
by kydem on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 01:22:30 AM EST

Re: Feingold (3.00 / 1)

Perhaps the decks are clearing for the return of Vice President Gore?  We can only hope...


by IrishAlum on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 09:28:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Majority Leader Feingold (3.00 / 1)

Since he's staying in the Senate it makes me think what a great majority leader he'd make at some point.


by Quinton on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 01:25:48 AM EST

Re: Majority Leader Feingold (3.00 / 3)

He's too independent to be Majority Leader. And I mean that as a compliment.

In a few cycles he might be Judiciary Comm. Chairman. How fucking sweet would that be?


by zt155 on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 02:26:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Majority Leader Feingold (none / 0)

Unfortunately you are right... and unfortunately in our country, politics and ability often do not mix.


by yitbos96bb on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 11:02:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Majority Leader Feingold (none / 0)

Senator Patrick Leahy will be the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee this cycle.  He's a progressive Senator and supported Feingold's censure resolution.  Let's not hope for his demise anytime soon.  


John McCain will privatize social security.
by gunnar on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 08:05:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senator Russ Feingold Will Not Seek The Presid (none / 0)

No.  I am shocked.  I have had him as one of the people I was eyeing for 08.  Warner was another one.  I live in Northern Illinois and my brother lives in Wisconsin.  He is a huge fan.  
I have grown to admire feingold so much.
CQ Politics had a great write up about him today by Craig Crawford in his 08 contenders list.
Now I'm sad.
by vwcat on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 01:29:43 AM EST

Re: Senator Russ Feingold Will Not Seek The Presid (none / 0)

Same here. I no longer know who I will support, though Wes Clark, and possibly John Edwards look great. One thing to note, isn't it great how prinicpled candidates aren't immediately jumping on the '06 Bandwagon, while DLC'ers like Tom Vilsack jump on the DAY AFTER?


by JewishJake on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 01:33:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senator Russ Feingold Will Not Seek The Presid (3.00 / 1)

I don't think it has anything to do with principles.  The fact is, it takes years to run for president.  If a candidate declared he was running for president next March, all he or she would be left with is principles.

For god's sake, the first Republican debate is in February!  I imagine ours will be similarly early.


by MyDD Fan on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 02:15:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Edwards is the way I will go. (3.00 / 2)

Maybe Feingold will still consider VP.


Check out the New Progressive Blog EENRBLOG
by dk2 on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 11:07:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senator Russ Feingold Will Not Seek The Presid (3.00 / 1)

As inspiring and principled as Russ Finegold is, I don't think he was a winner for the presidency. Perhaps he recognized this. And perhaps seeing the shift of power he saw he could do some good in the Senate.


by cmpnwtr on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 01:35:34 AM EST

Re: Senator Russ Feingold Will Not Seek The Presid (3.00 / 2)

I don't think he stood much of a chance either. But that he was able to see this shows that he is a true patriot. A good basic definition of patriot is one who places the interests of his or her country over his or her own personal interests. Feingold evidently decided that it was not worth distracting Democrats with a campaign that, seen objectively, had few chances of emerging victorious, despite the costs to any personal ambition he may have had that this choice created. If only Hillary and Bill could reason in a similarly objective and patriotic fashion.

I think this leaves Gore and Edwards as the only two Democrats with a realistic chance of winning the presidency in 2008. These are the only Democrats who have run in presidential elections in the past two cycles who have not been utterly discredited. Dems would do well to focus on this fact.


by Alexander on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 04:31:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senator Russ Feingold Will Not Seek The Presid (none / 0)

Edwards got railed pretty hard in 2004.  If Edwards is viable, then Obama is equally if not more viabal.


by yitbos96bb on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 11:06:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Kerry was in Charge - there wasn't much Edwards (3.00 / 1)

could do with the Kerry people in Charge.


Check out the New Progressive Blog EENRBLOG
by dk2 on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 11:08:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senator Russ Feingold Will Not Seek The Presid (3.00 / 1)

I don't see that at all ... he played an important role in winning the support of a majority of Ohio voters, and if it had been Edwards/Kerry, would have won even more.

Mind you, there's no saying whether it would have been enough to gain Ohio's electoral votes, with Ken Blackwell as Sec'y of State. Replacing him with Judge Brunner is, in and of itself, a tremendous boost to Democratic chances in '08.


The words of the prophets are written on the subway halls
   and tenement halls
by BruceMcF on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 12:16:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senator Russ Feingold Will Not Seek The Presid (3.00 / 1)

I agree - it should have been Edwards/Kerry .


Check out the New Progressive Blog EENRBLOG
by dk2 on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 12:59:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senator Russ Feingold Will Not Seek The Presid (3.00 / 4)

Truly dissapointing.

You know I would have been sitting next to you on that plane, Chris.  A lot of folks would have climbed aboard.

Tim


by Tim Tagaris on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 01:38:43 AM EST

Re: Senator Russ Feingold Will Not Seek The Presid (3.00 / 1)

Hell ... I would have bagged college and came out too ... I'd get the seat across the aisle .. as I am in north Philly   ;-)


John McCain: Bush right to veto kids health insurance expansion
by Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 02:57:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senator Russ Feingold Will Not Seek The Presid (3.00 / 1)

As someone who has worked for Russ already I would have to say you all would have really liked working for him. Russ's supporters are as loyal as can be, his staff really knows their business and he runs great ads and he is a tireless worker.

BTW, nice job on the Lamont campaign, and I am waiting to see who in 08 you will work for.


by jbou on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 12:01:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

My first choice, bummer. (none / 0)

We will soon notice  the impact of his legislation in our daily lives.  We are very lucky.  Here are my three choices in the correct order: Gore/Clark/Edwards.


by jncamane on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 01:59:01 AM EST

Re: My first choice, bummer. (3.00 / 1)

Gore's been my first choice all along.   He's the one guy that, if he runs, I'll do whatever I can to help: knock on doors, stuff envelopes, you name it.

But Gore's probably not running, and Russ has been my next choice ever since the censure resolution.

So now, barring a serious draft-Gore movement, it's down to Edwards and Clark.


by RT on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 07:40:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senator Russ Feingold Will Not Seek The Presid (3.00 / 1)

As much as I like Feingold I have been concerned about the number of potential Presidential candidates that Democrats have in the Senate and the possible negative impact that might have on the Democratic agenda.  Hopefully we will see the opposite happen with the Republicans and many Republicans will retire from the Senate to run for President now that they are in the minority, especially those up for re-election in 2008.

Russ is still young enough for a future run or even to serve in the cabinet of a new Democratic administration.


by msstaley on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 02:00:26 AM EST

Re: Senator Russ Feingold Will Not Seek The Presid (none / 0)

That is an outstanding point. There have been some idiotic votes cast by Senators who are just trying to read the tea leaves.


by zt155 on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 02:28:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

My first reaction... (3.00 / 2)

Was a word beginning with "f" and rhyming with "duck".

For those of you who don't know me, and I'm pretty much of a lurker on non-Feingold related threads, I've been doing Feingold for President blogging since December 2004. In fact, kind of ironically, Senator Feingold's not-running announcement came exactly 23 months to the day of  my first post at russfeingold.blogspot.com

Honestly, I haven't read all of his statement yet. As un-manly as it is, I'm almost starting to cry now. Like Chris, I was so ready to drop my whole life (the glamorous second-year law student, no car, studio apartment life it is!) and head to Wisconsin or wherever to help Senator Feingold on his campaign.

On my most recent blog posting, I wrote two and a half single spaced pages about why I support Senator Feingold. Maybe now I'll post it here now, as since he's out of the running I'm less likely to get comments about how he's a twice-divorced Jew or he voted against the first Iraq War.

Anyhow, my reasons came down to a couple of characteristics and a couple of issues that, in my imagination where I'm Josh Lyman, I thought could be the be the catchphrases of a Feingold campaign: Vision. Courage. Integrity. Fighting terrorism while protecting civil liberties. Making the global economy work for everybody. Making government accountable to the public interest, not the special intersts.

Yeah, maybe you could say some of those things about some of the other possible candidates, but I have a hard time thinking of one I could say them all about.

I wanted Russ to run so Americans could see a real unabashed progressive in action. I wanted him to run so Democrats could vote for their hopes and not their fears. And, yeah, I wanted him to run cause I thought maybe I could work on his campaign and have a great adventure while helping my country and my party in the process.

Now, I don't know what to do. I think maybe I'll cry. Then get some sleep. Then start building that time machine so I can travel back to 1988 and get Paul Simon elected. I can get a DeLorean...does anyone know how to build a flux capacitor?

(And now I just realized I'll have to get some kind of law related job for next summer...f-duck again!)  


by Paul Simon Democrat on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 02:01:18 AM EST

I volunteered for Simon in IA in 1987 (none / 0)

and flew home from college to caucus fir him in 1988. God I loved that man!

Feingold will do great in the Senate.


Join the Iowa progressive community at Bleeding Heartland.
by desmoinesdem on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 08:48:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I volunteered for Simon in IA in 1987 (none / 0)

I always enjoy it how whenever I post under this name or mention Senator Simon, there is always someone out there who's life he's touched.

Unfortunately, I was too young to ever vote for him (9 in 1990 when he last ran for reelection) and despite living in St. Louis and Chicago my whole life, I never got to see him in person.


by Paul Simon Democrat on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 01:53:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Gore/Kerry/Clinton/Clark/Edwards (none / 0)

In that order.

Gore is an obvious standout from every possible vantage point. The other four all national campaign experience and significant experience with national media, or both.

The next election is not a scrimmage. We need the varsity.


by stevehigh on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 02:08:21 AM EST

Re: Gore/Kerry/Clinton/Clark/Edwards (3.00 / 1)

I definitely agree with Gore first. He and Feingold are the only clear choices, and with Russ out now, there's no question what needs to happen.

After Gore, I would probably choose General Clark. I had liked Edwards, but lately, I have been thinking that he's still a little too green for the job, even though he has done great work on poverty.

Definitely not Kerry or Clinton. Of people with real governmental experience, maybe Bill Richardson. And who knows, a complete dark horse right now like Ed Rendell? Pennsylvanians absolutely love the guy (got re-elected by 20 points on Tuesday).

But Gore has to run now.


by PsiFighter37 on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 02:13:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Gore/Kerry/Clinton/Clark/Edwards (none / 0)

So, that's two people that were in the straw polls here that aren't running, and Gore's not in them.  Why is that?


by attorney at arms on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 02:41:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Gore/Kerry/Clinton/Clark/Edwards/Rendell (none / 0)

No, PsiFighter, please. Rendell's the one who did Chuck Schumer's bidding and cleared the deck for Bobby Casey, against his will, to run against Rick Santorum, who was so unpopular I could have won, and then coached Bobby to come out with speeches in support of Alito.

He's a decent governor, considering the alternatives, but not somebody you'd want to promote.


by joyful alternative on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 09:50:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senator Russ Feingold Will Not Seek The Presid (none / 0)

Well that is really sad. Oh well, at leat he will be representing me for years to come.


Jeremy Bentham sucks!!
by Forward with Feingold on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 02:11:22 AM EST

Re: Senator Russ Feingold Will Not Seek The (none / 0)

damn... it almost feels like a part of me just died... perhaps a part of all of us just died.


by KainIIIC on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 02:20:06 AM EST

Feingold Will Not Seek The Presidency (none / 0)

Clark has a great national security resume but absolutely no domestic policy experience.  What's worse, if he IS planning on running he hasn't attempted to brush up on the domestic side since his ill-fated 2004 run.

I think John Edwards benefits most from Feingold not running.  The field is starting to shape up fairly well, with Vilsack and Bayh running for centrist Democrats, and Edwards running more to the left (friend of the poor and labor).  If Hillary runs (I don't think she will) then she's almost guranteed the black vote unless Obama runs.

I think Vilsack running almost makes Iowa insignificant, unless another candidate wins it.  Then it's huge.


by MyDD Fan on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 02:23:49 AM EST

Re: Feingold Will Not Seek The Presidency (none / 0)

That's not so bad. He'd make a nice VP for Edwards. Edwards brings the domestic policy issues experience and Clark adds to his more limited foreign policy experice.


by Quinton on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 03:44:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senator Russ Feingold (none / 0)

If Gore is gonna start running... time is right to start planting subtle seeds.  We really need this guy to run.  

my votes in order: gore/obama/Bill Rich/the vilsack-dodd-biden thing/bayh/clinton/edwards.

with the last two on that list bieng people that i would be working actively against.  


by Winston Smith on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 02:26:10 AM EST

Re: Senator Russ Feingold (3.00 / 1)

Why work actively against edwards?


by adamterando on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 09:00:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senator Russ Feingold (none / 0)

because if the primary comes down to edwards and anyone else.. i chose the latter.  


by Winston Smith on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 02:26:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senator Russ Feingold (3.00 / 1)

I still don't understand. What is it you don't like so much?


by adamterando on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 02:58:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senator Russ Feingold (none / 0)

Right there with you on the first two choices.  Gore still worries me a bit... not sure if the GOP thrashing of his reputation a few years has damaged him nationally... they tried to turn the man into a national joke and I'm still not sure how much of that has stuck... I get this feeling he'd be good against the Brownbacks of the world, BUT might have a harder time against a McCain, whom the media refuses to see is a bit of a wingnut and keep spreading the independent meme.  But beside that, based on principles and ability to lead, Gore is awesome!


by yitbos96bb on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 11:15:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I Feel The Same Way (none / 0)

There really isn't anyone else close to Feingold's level who's potentially in the running.  I understanding his reasoning, and I respect his decision.  But it's a great loss.

There is one possibility, though.  It's possible, just possible, that everything Al Gore has been through has radically transformed him into a very different person, as well as a very different politician than he was before.  I was never an Al Gore fan in the past.  But his willingness to speak up against the war when no one else of similar stature would definitely caught my attention.

I don't see him as someone I can trust and enthusiastically support the way I could Russ Feingold.  But I think there's a glimmer of a possibility that if he ran and was elected, he could turn out to be head and shoulders above any of the remaining possibilities.

Being cast out into the wilderness can do that, sometimes.  Right now, it's the only significant remaining possibility I see.


by Paul Rosenberg on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 02:41:11 AM EST

Re: Senator Russ Feingold Will Not Seek The Presid (none / 0)

I still hold onto some hope that Gore will decide to run.  Clark would make a great SecDef in a Gore administration.


by Disgusted in St Louis on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 02:50:17 AM EST

Re: Senator Russ Feingold Will Not Seek The Presid (3.00 / 1)

I would say a Gore/Obama ticket could be VERY powerful and great for this country.  Gore and the Dem congress could radically alter social policy in the country (and that's a good thing), strengthen domestic defense, while ending the Bush Doctrine (and hopefully reinstituting the Powell doctrine in warfare) and hopefully repair the divide our country has seen growing since the GOP worked hard to split us in 1994 and was brought to critical in 2000.  Also, Obama is groomed for a 2016 run, leading to 12-16 years of rule, a great Gore legacy and the ability to push our country forward and actually change the world.


by yitbos96bb on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 11:23:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senator Russ Feingold Will Not Seek The Presid (none / 0)

I agree a Gore/Obama would be great.  Some people are suggesting Obama as president for '08 but he doesn't have any experience as a leader, executive or manager. He doesn't inspire any confidence in me at this time as a presidential candidate, but I think he would make for a powerful ticket as VP.


by Disgusted in St Louis on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 04:58:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senator Russ Feingold Will Not Seek The Presid (none / 0)

Feingold for President would have been a very tough sell.  An awful lot of things would have had to break his way to even get the nomination in a crowded field -- let alone win a general.  Running with low name recognition and no money is not a recipe for success against the Clintons, Obamas, and Edwardses of the world.

This may be for the best:  he can be a great senator for the next 20-30 years and continue to do a lot of good work.


by LPMandrake on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 03:08:17 AM EST

Re: Senator Russ Feingold Will Not Seek The Presid (3.00 / 1)

Yeah, its one of the reasons I wish Hillary would STAY put in the senate.  I think she could be a strong leader in the senate... eventually second in command or she could be an asset as DSCC chair.  She would be of much better service staying as a senator than running for VP.


by yitbos96bb on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 11:27:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senator Russ Feingold Will Not Seek The Presid (1.00 / 1)

what a horrendous indictment of our political system .. a senator with the record and reputation of Russ Feingold can't compete against a pretty empty suit nobody like Edwards.


by Winston Smith on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 02:28:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I disagree with your position on Edwards! (none / 0)

Are you maybe an attorney?


Check out the New Progressive Blog EENRBLOG
by dk2 on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 04:44:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senator Russ Feingold Will Not Seek The Presid (none / 0)

I am getting troll rated for saying that Edward's almost non-exsistent record can't compete with the accomplishments of Feingold?  Uh oh.. the nastiness is starting early, and the Edwards crowd seems to be a particularly desperate and petty bunch.  

Just so everyone knows, I will continue to do whatever I can to ensure that a qualified candidate wins the '08 Dem nomination.  

And I wont resort to throwing around bad mojo.  


by Winston Smith on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 05:55:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Senator Russ Feingold Wi (3.00 / 0)

I was never really a Russ for president supporter, but I think he's a terrific senator and obviously one hell of a man.  So best of wishes to him, and hopefully he adds the occassional kick in the ass to the Democratic caucus when it really counts.


by Ryan Anderson on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 04:00:11 AM EST

Dam , BUT (none / 0)

I say DAM I wish that he would have ran. But CT reelected JOE LIEBERMAN so I am glad that RUSS will be there to help BLOCK DIRTY JOES EFFORTS into making the DEMOCRATIC PARTY OF BIG CORP: RUSS WILL HELP TO TURN THE DEMOCRATIC back into the party of F.D.R. and J.F.K.


by blackjack on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 04:19:07 AM EST

Re: Senator Russ Feingold Will Not Seek The Presid (none / 0)

Russ Feingold is one of two people I have written a note if thanks to for standing up  for America and against this administration.  The other is Rocky Anderson, the mayor of Salt Lake City.


by USAagain on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 06:08:31 AM EST

Re: Senator Russ Feingold Will Not Seek The Presid (none / 0)

Keith Olbermann


by USAagain on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 06:18:13 AM EST

I understand his decision (none / 0)

I think a lot of us realized the impact we can all make locally and now that the tide has turned we should do the most we can for the people and places closest to us.

If we all take care of our little sections of the globe the rewards will be great.  Charity begins at home...repeat.


DAGGER
by goplies on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 06:21:32 AM EST

Just who is going to run? (none / 0)

You kind of get the feeling that the potential obstacles to a Clinton candidacy are being set aside as a result of actions behind the scenes.  Gore clearly stated quite some time ago that he won't run, and now Warner and Feingold have said the same thing.  So who is running?  Vilsack?  Obama?  Vilsack has no name recognition and no real ability to threaten Clinton.  Obama is starting to get plenty of name recognition but hardly has the gravitas to take down Clinton.  Kerry might run but he's dead politically.  Is Edwards going to run?  Clark?  Clark doesn't have anywhere near enough political savvy to take on Clinton.  I think at this point Clinton would have to be at least a 10:1 favorite.


by RickD on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 07:10:32 AM EST

I think Clinton will not run (3.00 / 1)

I think Edwards and Gore and Clark will.


Join the Iowa progressive community at Bleeding Heartland.
by desmoinesdem on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 08:55:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I'm still hoping Al Gore will run in 2008, (none / 0)

...even though he's said he's not planning to.

He hasn't made an official "I will not run in 2008" speech.


by Eric Jaffa on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 08:55:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Joe Biden and Chris Dodd have each announced... (none / 0)

...that they're running for US President.


by Eric Jaffa on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 08:56:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Just who is going to run? (none / 0)

HRC is more vulnerable in a small field, especially if it becomes a field of two within the first month. Recent events - Warner and now Feingold not running - suggest that the number of candidates with a realistic chance is going to be smaller than might have been expected.


by kundalini on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 09:04:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Just who is going to run? (none / 0)

Hillary has unlimited money--she's the favorite in our capitalist political system.


by melh on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 10:56:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Just who is going to run? (none / 0)

Sure she is the favourite and I happen to think she'll win but this doesn't change the fact that one anti-hillary candidate is likely to get more votes than if the anti-hillary vote is split between 4 or 5 candidates.


by kundalini on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 11:05:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I'll take this as a positive (none / 0)

IMO, the netroots would have overplayed Feingold in '08. I love the guy but where he is, kind of like Kucinich.

I wanted Warner in and Kerry and Feingold out. So that's a win and a loss so far.

I guess I prefer Gore, then Edwards.


by Gary Kilbride on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 07:37:04 AM EST

Re: Senator Russ Feingold (none / 0)

Feingold was my first choice, but I was disappointed to hear him telling Stephanopolous or one of the Sunday chat hosts that he could not beat McCain.  Best to keep him in the Senate.


by Bob H on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 07:54:49 AM EST

Re: Senator Russ Feingold Will Not Seek The Presid (none / 0)

Russ Feingold is a great politician - perhaps the best in out country. Sad to hear he isn't running.

Barack Obama is my choice. Just watch these clips on YouTube:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ZyW7X4isOEo

http://youtube.com/watch?v=P-qLDWQQmmo

Wow. No Republican candidate will stand a chance against Obama.


The history of the left is a history of purists betraying the progressive movement so that they can feel good about their righteous selves.
by Populism2008 on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 07:58:12 AM EST

Best Senator (none / 0)

well, he is the best Senator in the whole club.  He would have been a longshot.  This does change the race.  I wonder how much "Obomamamania" has to do with his decision.  On Wisconsin!  Forward Feingold!


by howardpark on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 08:35:40 AM EST

Chris Bowers- We need you to continue your... (none / 0)

...great work of making sure we have a US House candidate in almost all 435 districts.

I hope Democrats run at least as many House candidates in 2008 as in 2006.


by Eric Jaffa on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 08:53:11 AM EST

Re: Senator Russ Feingold Will Not Seek The Presid (none / 0)

Wow. I've been talking Feingold up. There's really no one else who I feel passionate about. Clark I guess.
Maybe I'll apply my political interest to democratic Congressional primaries and races in '08. This year has certainly whetted my interest for Congressional campaigns.

by johnalive on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 09:16:25 AM EST

It has to be Clark (none / 0)

Sad to hear that Feingold is out but he did have some baggage.  Voted to confirm Ashcroft.  Opposed Kosovo action - the successful military operation, ordered by Clinton and executed by Clark, that ended a genocide.

It's all about stopping Hillary, or whatever mushy "moderate" that takes her place.  The more left candidates in the race, the more difficult that will be.

Our options:

Kerry - deserves to be president but screwed up too many times.  "I voted for the $87 billion before I voted against it."  Botched joke from last week.  Had his chance.

Edwards - one term senator, never re-elected to anything. Tooled by Cheney in debate.  Didn't help Kerry in ANY state as far as I can see.

Gore - a possibility.  Those of us who were glued to thwe TV on election night 2000 remember the rush and euphoria we felt when Florida was taken out of the Bush column and Gore retracted his concession.  He won that election, but it should never have been that close.

Obama - not yet.  Get re-elected and then we'll talk.  Great speaker but swing voters want more than that.

Vilsack - who the hell is this guy?

Bayh - and who the hell is this guy?

Clark - best option I see.  Opposed Iraq war way before it was fashionable.  Worked hard for Dem candidates across the country, incl. our own Ned Lamont!  (would have a lock on the blue states) Has extensive military resume which will help him out in the purple states (Ohio, Colorado, Iowa, Missouri and Arkansas).  He could also provide coattails for candidates down ticket.

Light on domestic policy but you could have an intern handle that stuff, or a VP.  I'm not sold yet, but this guy could do it.  And Joe liberman hates him, need I say more?


by mikesullivan on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 09:29:14 AM EST

Re: Senator Russ Feingold Will Not Seek The Presid (none / 0)

This is shaping up to be potentially the most interesting primary since 1984 in terms of one candidate (Hillary) being the overwhelming favorite, and wondering who among the others will step up to be the alternative.  In '84, the favorite was Mondale, and Gary Hart stepped up.  Who will it be this time?  Also, Hillary herself hasn't announced that she is definitely running - some rumors have her wanting to go for majority leader instead.  Whether he has the experience or not, Barack Obama has the charisma it takes to be that alternative.


by cycleguy on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 09:43:44 AM EST

Re: Senator Russ Feingold Will Not Seek The Presid (none / 0)

The only way the Democrats lose in 2008 is IF they nominate Hillary. Let's face it folds, she is simply toxic, right or wrong, to a large percentage of the electorate.  I am continually surprised by the ignoring and omission of the one person who could certainly derail the Hillary Express: Al Gore.  He was shafted in 2000, was  right on the war, and has been a true visionary on the environment.  He sits on the board of Apple, are we in store for an Ipod like product introduction?  
www.minor-ripper.blogspot.com
The Ripper www.minor-ripper.blogspot.com
by MinorRipper on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 10:00:56 AM EST

Re: Senator Russ Feingold (none / 0)

Would you give $100 to the campaign of someone you really wanted to win in 08? I would, and so would 3 million in the netroots. Imagine a candidate so right for us that everyone ponied up in the first week and raised $300,000.  Just imagine.

Remember how the press was all over Bush in the early days because he raised So Much Money. Money was the story. It was intimidating and Hillary's money is her story, not anything she believes in, not who she is. Who IS she by the way? I think we could catapult (heheh) Gore with grassroots money if he announced. That's what I would like to see - Our candidate with our money out in front with such a big warchest from the jump that Corporate money is intimidated and folds. It's all about the money to Corps & corporate media.


by mrobinsong on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 10:05:48 AM EST

Re: Senator Russ Feingold (none / 0)

Ted Turner likes Gore
Appearing before a group of journalists and international policy leaders at Reuters' offices in New York, mogul-cum-mega-philanthropist Ted Turner said Tuesday that he thought the media -- particularly in the U.S. -- should work harder to cover all parts of the world "honestly, intelligently, and regularly," and spoke candidly about his foundation's work with the United Nations as well as his hope that Al Gore might be persuaded to run for U.S. President in 2008.
Editor & Publisher David S. Hirschma Posted September 19, 2006
by mrobinsong on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 10:13:45 AM EST

Re: Senator Russ Feingold (none / 0)

yes he does


.. and when I win the lottery, gonna donate half my money to the city so they have to name a school or a park after me - camper van beethoven
by heyAnita on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 10:19:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]

rats! (none / 0)

:-(


.. and when I win the lottery, gonna donate half my money to the city so they have to name a school or a park after me - camper van beethoven
by heyAnita on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 10:18:53 AM EST

There is no one else with the progressive (none / 0)

credentials that Feingold brought to the table. I expected Feingold to do a much better Kucinich. Not even having a decent progressive in the mix would be a huge loss for us all.

We here in Chicago have lost Jesse Jackosn Jr. as a mayoral candidate and now this. But perhaps it is for the better. Running progressives at the top without the base of progressive office-holders at the bottom is what we have been accusing third parites of doing wrong.

So lets step back from the presidential race and observe it as we act to elect more progressives locally and nationally.


Jeff Wegerson - PrairieStateBlue
by wegerje on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 10:29:08 AM EST

Gore - with Warner VP (3.00 / 1)

Warner puts Virginia's electoral votes in play.

Gore - with Ford's help puts Tennessee back into the battleground column.

Gore is right up there with Feingold when it comes to speaking truth to power.


by MorrisMeyer on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 10:44:22 AM EST

I disagree with Ford helping anyone that is (none / 0)

a Democrat - he might as well switch parties.


Check out the New Progressive Blog EENRBLOG
by dk2 on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 11:20:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Al Gore (none / 0)

You had me at "Al Gore". He's already won a presidential election.


543,895 votes
by Michael Bersin on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 11:02:45 AM EST

Kucinich (none / 0)

Is there any talk of Kucinich running again? If there are no other candidates on the left he would likely pick up even more votes this time than 2004.


BlueSunbelt.Com Netroots for the Sunbelt states robwire.com My personal blog
by robliberal on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 11:05:51 AM EST

Re: Senator Russ Feingold (3.00 / 1)

We should figure out a way to do the head in the jar thing on Futurama and then bring back Roosevelt on a robot body.    Think of how great that would be ;-)


by yitbos96bb on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 11:31:11 AM EST

Roosevelt-o-Rama... (none / 0)

The problem is that we'd get the 1945 model.

Now the 1932 or 1936 model...now we're talkin'.  ;-)


by palamedes on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 12:13:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

My two bits... (none / 0)

Hillary has two choices at the moment, essentially - Senate Majority Leader or running for President.  She's a wonk at heart, so the former job has to be pulling at her very, very hard.  Running for President, well, she'd probably get the nomination, but it would be a bloody mess in the process, I suspect, even if her only opponents were Edwards, Byah and Clark.  And not to lay the drama on thick, but I sincerely believe that her running would literally put her life at risk more than any other candidate, such is the level of Clinton hatred on the right.

Finally, I think that the promotion of Hillary's poor use of campaign funds, posted earlier here on MyDD, if promoted well (hint, hint...) will send a serious chill down the spine of party establishment folks that want to prevent a repeat of a total lack of coattails that occured during Big Dog's administration.

As to Gore, it depends on which version would show up.  I well remember how he would be very much the man I walked 18 precincts solo for in 2000 one day, and sound more like the VP of an insurance company than a man running hard for President the next.  I think Gore today, in his heart, is much like Bobby Kennedy was late in his life - transformed by startling experiences into being more of what his heart tells him is so, rather than what the polls or advisors delcare to be the truth.  But if he made noises about wanting to run, I'd take a very close look at his staff first.

Evan Bayh is out to run - make no mistake about that.  And he knows his money on hand is going to be key.  I've already had a conversation with a state legislator who asked me what I thought of Bayh, he knowing I was orginally from Indiana, and, being diplomatic, told him "Well, he has a big campaign chest, that's for sure."  The legislator sighed and said, "Yes....Yes, he does."  He said more with that comment than you can imagine.  Whether he can win or not is another question entirely.  I would personally say not, unless he can somehow sound like Edwards, which I doubt is possible, in large part because I think the best he could do would be to triangulate much like Hillary does, only more forcefully and with greater width between the three points, if that makes any sense.

Clark - nice guy, intelligent guy, future Secretary of Defense.

Edwards - my choice at the moment, though not with a lot of verve.  I need to hear/see him again face-to-face to decide if I'm serious about him or not.  He's taken the Southern Populist mode and made it fresh for the 21st Century, and I think that would get him a lot of unexpected support.  But he's also low on the experience meter, and I wonder just how much he would jettison or ignore some social issues in order to not come across as "too liberal" to swing voters.

Obama - VP material at best.  He's a "rockstar" at the moment, but if his latest speeches get wider publicity and if he isn't seen as moving forward progressive legislation now that he's part of the new majority in the Senate, people are going to wonder about his level of substance.  If he's smart, he'll work like a dog in the Senate for his term, prepare for a winning re-election campaign in 2010, and kick butt in the 2012 Presidential cycle.  But logic and ego are lousy in bed together.

Richardson - nah.  If he runs, he will crash and burn, I think, be it for President or Vice-President.  And frankly, I see no fire in his belly for either job.

And of course there are always potential surprises.  If the establishment Dems somehow force Dean out of the Chairmanship of the DNC, my home will be Draft Dean HQ for the Eastside suburbs of Seattle, oh, about five minutes later.  (It'll take a few minutes to clear out the downstairs living room.)  There might be someone out there that we haven't considered as yet.  (Just for fun, I'll throw out former Governor John Kitzhaber of Oregon for grins and giggles.)

But no matter how it plays out, I would strongly adivse that, having worked very hard for both Gore and Dean, folks like Matt, Jonathan and Chris look very losely at who their staff people are - that will tell us more than anything else about what can be expected of a given candidate.


by palamedes on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 12:11:59 PM EST

Re: My two bits... (none / 0)

This "Obama has no substance" meme is really misplaced.  He has done a lot of substantive work as state senator and, somehow, as a senator from the minority party (not an easy task).  And he has a well articulated vision for change (I'd recommend reading his book).


by LPMandrake on Sun Nov 12, 2006 at 05:37:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: My two bits... (none / 0)

However, the Federal level, especially the Senate, is a very different game.  Paul Wellstone, who I have a lot of respect for, was pummelled without mercy early on in his Senate career for gaffe after gaffe.  It takes time, mentorship and the development of specific skills to be an effective Senator, and Obama isn't there yet.

By 2012, no question that he has the potential to be Presidential material.  Just not now.


by palamedes on Mon Nov 13, 2006 at 01:27:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.