How many Russ Feingold 2008 supporters are here?

I am not trying to start any arguments, I'm just curious to see who here supports Senator Feingold for a 2008 Presidential run. Please DON'T post if you don't support him.

BTW - Here's a Russ Feingold for President site: www.russforpresident.com

I knew him in passing from his campaign in '95/96 ... he had a volunteer org at the UW campus I was at, and while I was working on local campaign stuff, I did get to meet him a time or two.


:hi:

senator. He has my support for President.

Of course I know VERY little about him at this point.

Thanks for the link.

The Patriot Act passed in the House now it is up to the Senate according to MSNBC front page.

I am going to thank Russ Feingold and the other brave patriots who are opposing the unPatriot Act.

http://political.moveon.org/patriotact/?id=6528-4364099-4TZ6AO9zjMHJ52UA7prCOA&t=3

==YOUR COMMENT TO CONGRESS

A bipartisan group of Senators have said they will filibuster any reauthorization bill unless it contains key reforms to protect our civil liberties. Pick up your phone right now and tell your Senators to vote against cloture, support the filibuster and oppose any Patriot Act reauthorization bill that does not that does not include real reforms.

The courageous Senators vowing to filibuster the reauthorization bill - John Sununu (R-NH), Larry Craig (R-ID), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Russ Feingold (D-WI) and Ken Salazar (D-CO) need to be thanked for taking a principled stand for freedom and urged to hold their ground. Please call now.

Go to http://action.aclu.org/call to call now. Or, read more about this critical moment in the fight to reform the Patriot Act before taking action. Then, after calling, be sure to tell your friends.

along with the Communications Decency Act. Only three of those senators are still around (McCain, Leahy, and Feingold). He's had a long history of standing up for Civil Liberties. Not just on the Patriot Act.

http://www.wave-guide.org/library/tca_hist.html

Welcome to DU Blue Awards. I am frequent vistior of that site and have set up a Russ For President group on Care2.

Right now if Kerry doesn't run I'm probably going to support Warner but I would also support Feingold. I think they would be great together. I think Feingold would be a great president too! It's so hard to choose!! I think 2008 will have a lot of great canidates and a lot more choices from all over the isle (from liberal to conservative)!

He seems like a decent fellow... i've got no quarrel with Warner as a person.

but I can't even stand to listen to him talk.

He appears to me like another "wooden" candidate. Half of what he says doesn't seem particularly meaningful, and the other half of what he says, I'm not even listening to because his delivery style and presentation comes off as, well, wooden.

When I'm envisioning the individual in the white house, i'm thinking: is that the voice i want to hear as the Leader of the Free World for the next 8 years?

Now Feingold on the other hand, i can listen to him all day long.

no mealy mouth, but a lot of passion and conviction - no question, no doubt.

I absolutely loved how Feingold argued against the patriot act (as written) on the floor in the Senate yesterday, in a very good debate with Arlen Specter - loved his come back to Specter, when Specter said something, if he had his "druthers" he wouldn't have accepted it - and Feingold comes right back to it and said this isn't a matter about "Druthers"! this about the CONSTITUTION and the Bill of Rights!

Yeah!

On Edit: I couldn't tell you a single thing that Warner will fight for, that's important to me. But I can tell you what Senator Feingold will fight and that which is important to the entire country!

How about stem cell research? Roe V Wade? LGBT rights? He is pro-choice, for stem cell research and for LBGT rights.

the defecit. He had a defecit and turned it into a surplus. But back to Feingold....

and has been awarded the 'defecit hawk' award numerous times (not many Democrats get those) :)

I would encourage that he (Warner) seek a Senate position...

just can't get behind him as a president... not because of positions, it's a personality thing.. ;)

(edited for clarity)

The other two are Clark and Warner.

In the past two years he's really got my attention, and he's been on the progressive side of MOST issues, though he did screw up badly on the bankruptcy bill - to which i voiced my opinion with his staff member (my impression is, so did a lot of other people) and I didn't appreciate his vote on Roberts confirmation, however that said - i think he was keeping his powder dry on the Roberts issue, i did appreciate his questions put to Roberts in the Confirmation hearings.

But on the whole, Feingold has demonstrated a committment, and a passion to the principles of the Constitution and the citizenry to which it is supposed to serve, and which he has sworn to protect and defend.

I trust him -he's principled, he's not a mealy mush mouth, he's got a ton of couragge and the cajones to fight, and boy does he.

That's the kind of democrat we need elected to office across the board.

Here are two links I found:

http://feingold.senate.gov/~feingold/statements/05/03/2005310448.html
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/9/3/16952/58015

And a quote:

On the Senate floor, Feingold again asked: "Do we want to require a soldier to sit down at a computer and take a credit counseling or credit education course while they are in Iraq in order to protect his or her family back home from financial ruin?"

I am pretty sure he has been against it from the start - am I wrong?

I'm THRILLED to be corrected!

but i read differently and so did others, who actually placed phone calls to his office and sent letters - may that have occurred BEFORE the vote????

Again, if i have the wrong information wrt to his vote on that bill, i'm delighted to be corrected and it even further heightens my esteem for him, which is fairly high already.....

Feingold voted No on S.256, the laughably Republican named, Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0312-03.htm

How Did Your Senators Vote?

Roll Call 44: On Passage of the Bill (S. 256 As Amended )Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005.
Yea 74

Alexander (R-TN)
Allard (R-CO)
Allen (R-VA)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Bennett (R-UT)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burns (R-MT)
Burr (R-NC)
Byrd (D-WV)
Carper (D-DE)
Chafee (R-RI)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
DeWine (R-OH)
Dole (R-NC)
Domenici (R-NM)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Frist (R-TN)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Inouye (D-HI)
Isakson (R-GA)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kohl (D-WI)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Lott (R-MS)
Lugar (R-IN)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reid (D-NV)
Roberts (R-KS)
Salazar (D-CO)
Santorum (R-PA)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Stevens (R-AK)
Sununu (R-NH)
Talent (R-MO)
Thomas (R-WY)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)



Nay 25

Akaka (D-HI)
Boxer (D-CA)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Corzine (D-NJ)
Dayton (D-MN)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Harkin (D-IA)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Obama (D-IL)
Reed (D-RI)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Schumer (D-NY)
Wyden (D-OR)

Not Voting 1 Clinton (D-NY)

Glad to hear that because I thought he voted for it too.

That was one moment where I was very proud of Barbara. There were supposed to be more Dem votes to stand with her, but she stood there alone to vote on that and make a difference. I'll cut him some slack on that one though.

I was so sad.

Right now, he is my second choice after Kerry and i could support him with great enthusiasm.

Feingold/Obama would a great ticket, but having 2 midwesterners might not be very good.

as long as he doesn't do a hands off also on Alito as well... Certainly makes up for the Roberts "yes" with all of the other stuff he's done.

Even though I disagree with his Roberts vote, he makes a very valid argument as to why he did it. He is consistent when voting for nominees - he doesn't believe he should vote against a nominee because of conservativeness, just like Republicans should vote against one for liberalness. He really believes in protecting the integrity of the system... Roberts WAS VERY qualified, and he saw that.

I give him that "on principle" thing with Roberts, though there's still a lot we weren't allowed to find out about him that bugged me. We see a lot more now about Alito that shouldn't be allowed in the court too. Hope he doesn't give in on Alito too!

Feingold needed to keep his powder dry, I think for the Patriot Act and possibly the Alito confirmation (possibly).

won't endear him to the fundies, BUT--he's probably the smartest, most principled guy in the Senate. He voted right on the authorization, right on the supplemental, and right on the Patriot Act. He's actually trying to do something about campaign finance corruption, which, IMO, is an even greater threat to our democracy than touch-screen voting. I'd happily support Russ in '08--in fact, there's no other Democrat I can think of that deserves my unqualified support.

I am not a blind supporter of him, but charisma is one thing he definitely DOES bring to the table. Unlike Kerry or Gore, you can listen to him speak for hours. He is a tremendous speaker and most Wisconsin residents will tell you that.

As a Wisconsinite, I will gladly amen your comments. He is an excellent speaker and though not always very fiery, he definitely has that certain something many politicians lack - charisma.

But, I imagine being from Wisconsin, I've gotten to see the many sides of Russ Feingold - the candidate, the politician, the debater, the thinker and the man. I fully realize most people outside of Wisconsin haven't had that priveledge yet.

compared to a corpse or a fire hydrant. I live in Wisconsin, too, and I saw his debates last year--while he won them hands-down, he looked like a pissed-off raccoon while doing so. He has some work to do to get ready for prime time, IMO. But you know what? Who gives a flying fuck. Maybe the American people have finally wised up enough to vote for substance over pseudo-style. Maybe.

1 - You said he looked like a pissed off raccoon... damnit, his opponent was TIM MICHELS! I would be insulted if Republicans put him against me! But that is a valid point, he did get criticized, but I think it was mostly because he made michels look stupid, which was unavoidable.

2 - As far as charisma is concerned... it does matter (if you want to get elected), and I don't think it is shallow to care about one's charisma. People feel that the more charismatic someone is, the better, more understanding and honest the president will be, IMHO

"I support the Patriot Act even though I haven't read it." Russ BUSTED him up, big time. But if charisma is, in fact, a big deal, then Russ is going to have to start studying his own tapes, and working on the eyebag thing. Otherwise Warner's going to clean his clock. Warner is VERY smooth.

the guy is charasmatic - and as importantly he isn't BORING. He's succinct, to the damn point - he's erudite AND down to earth at the same time.

No thirty different ways to hell and back to explain a vote for something before he voted against it -- no no no no.

No thirty different ways to hell and back to explain why the war in iraq is dead wrong.

No thirty different ways to hell and back to explain what the meaning of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are all about!


I can go on, but i hope i made my point.

and as far as the marriage status is concerned, it's about damn time we dropped the stepford wife thing for the white house. there's no honest necessity for the president to be married - not even for "national security" reasons.

then that writes off having two divorces as THE reason that fundies won't support him. I think they will use it to *rationalize* why they won't vote for him, but when it gets down to it, they care more that he's "liberal" than whether he's been divorced much. Just like fundies don't care about "Who would Jesus bomb?" question much either! They're pretty good about being hypocrites!

Because that's my personal odds-on favorite Repuke tag-team for '08. They'd be complete idiots if they went any other way.

when he couldn't get through the nomination process to the general election where he might have had a better shot at winning the governorship when he faced Davis before.

Wingnuts will make the same mistake and avoid such a ticket like the plague. They'll be fearful that too many fundies will stay home, or perhaps vote for someone like Pat Robertson or Patrick Buchanan if either of them were to run independent in such a scenario.

to McCain--the subtext is pretty obvious. But McCain's pro-life, pro-intelligent design--pretty much the full fundie agenda. How anybody thinks this guy is a moderate is beyond me, exceptt hat he's actually capable of doing some bipartisan work in the Senate. I think his support of campaign finance reform is the biggest nail in his coffin, as far as the repuke establishment is concerned.

;)

Its just the midwestern variety. Of course standing up for whats right, competence, honesty and representing average Americans is charismatic in and of itself given the current environment.

and he's a nice guy and really interacts well with others and laughs and stuff. I hate how the media gets on the band wagon that democrats are snob elitiests when they aren't. They did it with Kerry and Gore and it's farther from the truth.

He's got my vote and all the resources I can spare.

... I said, "Yup, THAT'S the guy!" And I haven't changed my mind since.

Straight-forward, well-spoken -- always reminds me of a really good high school teacher or college prof, the ones who made the most complicated concepts seem like just good ol' common sense.

Feingold in '08!

i saw him in an interview with jon nichols on some radio show that was being broadcast on C-Span - i was simply astonished that he wasn't the candidate running against Bush - though i realize he likely would have lost in 2004 - because the truth of the war wasn't out there in the MSM yet -


but now, times are different and i think he could stand a decent chance - i'd fight like hell for his candidacy, and now being corrected on the bankruptcy bill there's no negative marks against his progressive/populist record - and i honestly think a populist like Feingold could win in a FAIR & CLEAN election.

but comes off with Midwestern charm - much like Bill Clinton.

A true genius

or more importantly a Rhodes Milner Round Table member.. ;)

I worked with Russ' campaign last year and it was easy to drum up support when I was out knocking on doors. The same folks that swore at the mention of Kerry's name had good things to say about him -- particularly his stands on the Patriot Act and Iraq.

If I wasn't a Clarkie, he would have my support.

Even though him being single might be fatal. I'd take that chance, though, I'm not supporting anyone in the primaries that I have to hold my nose for out of fear of "electability". Give me someone with spine, integrity and a clear message, that will do more to get them elected that all that other bullshit.

!

and although I see quite a few downsides to Feingold if the attempt would be for Democrats to actually WIN a General election.....I consider him a man of principal and action; qualities that I admire and support.....and that is NOT something I can say about many in the senate or in governors' mansions.

Feingold is a fighter and appears to stand for "something"-- He certainly is not a Bend over backward appeasing corporatist "finger to the wind" "can't have an opinion cause it would be dangerous FOR ME politically to do so right now" type. In fact, I doubt he would be invited to a Bildenberg meeting (that's a good thing, IMO).

Russ Feingold is certainly more of a "leader" than most in the pack, an independent thinker, another Rhodes Scholar (like Wes Clark), and is in it for something other than just for himself. He certainly would support investigations on Bush and them, something unnamed others ain't "into".

So barring a Wes Clark run, thus far, Feingold is one who has earned my respect, and possibly my support.

I'm a Clarkie but I like Russ very much.

A Clark/Feingold ticket would be a dream ticket for me and one very easy to work for in the General Election.

BTW, Senator Feingold is blogging at TPM Cafe's Table For One this week...
http://www.tpmcafe.com/section/tableforone

I think that they would complement each others' strengths and weaknesses well. Kind of like Feingold heading the ticket, but I could go the other way too. If not Clark, perhaps Boxer. But I think Clark/Feingold might be able to get more votes.

.

The religious right wingnuts will NEVER let a Jew become the prez, no matter how great we think the idea is of having Feingold on the ticket. A menorah in the WH instead of a "Christmas-cum-holiday tree?" The holy rollers would take that as not just a "war on Christmas," but a full-blown thermonuclear attack.

I'm just saying there are an awful lot of asshats who won't because of his religion. I love Russ more than my luggage.

Russ definitely appeals to independents in the midwest and progressives all over and if they combine Feingold can win nationally just like he pulls together all demographics in WI. The religious right will not be voting for any dem and never will.

..and will work my ass off for him if he wins the nomination.

Im not thrilled with his Roberts vote, but otherwise I can support him.

Never underestimate the stupid things that effect how people vote.

I think he's very smart, very honest, and very civil, all of which I like a lot. He's a senator and that's not a great launching pad for the presidency and he has no experience running a national campaign. If he runs, I'd be willing to take a good, hard look at him.

This is of course subject to change.

Of all the Democrats who stand a reasonable chance of winning the presidency, he by far has the most solid track record of supporting good public policy.

I'd have to think about it then at least.

than from any I've heard so far.

He voted against the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act. Big Statement, none of the other cowards were able to make.

:bounce:

But it's such a long way off!

only one I would vote for in the MN caucuses.

I'm a Clarkie, but I really like Russ Feingold. I've seen several interviews with him and really like what he has to say.

I would also support a ticket with Feingold/Clark in a heartbeat.

The commander in chief needs to be the prez. The Senator should preside over the Senate. I love both these guys, and I think it's the perfect combination, but in these times, the foreign policy/national security guy has to be in the oval. Russ would do his best work pushing on the domestic side getting legislation passed in Congress. Clark/Feingold is the ticket I would prefer, although I'd work my ass off for Feingold should he win the nom.

Could be an extremely effective team, and could bridge the moderate and progressive wings.

But, honestly, I am Anybody But Hillary at this point.

Julie

After his fight against the Patriot Act this week as well as some of the other things he's done recently, he is definitely expressing the message I think all Democrats should be putting forth. Here that Lieberman!!!!

We'll see what happens in the Primaries.

I'm still a Clark person right now though, but I of course will support any Democratic candidate that emerges from the primaries in '08.

I don't support ANYONE for a run in 2008 at this point. Feingold is on my list of people I will consider supporting when the time comes, if that counts.

but i still think Warner ought to run for Senate instead of for President.

likable and I TRUST THEM. Can't say that about some of the others mentioned above.
We just gotta win the next ones, for the planet's sake. The Repubs have wrecked everything - Dems get to fix all of it when we're back. damn them for it, too

Cause he would be harder for the NRA to run against. Feingold is pretty good on gun rights too, but has a few votes that might make him lose around here, especially the gun show thing. I want somebody who can win next time and reverse the Bush anti worker anti working class initiatives.

I LOVE HIM!!!

Yes, it would be a shame to lose him in the U.S. Senate. But he would do so much good for the country in the White House.

I tend to think that the "two divorces" and "liberal Jew" stigma might make Russ a better vice-presidential candidate, as a running mate for a Clark or a Warner (but NOT for Hillary Clinton, since they are not on good terms).

But I think it's early yet to make plans for 2008.