What Feingold's loss says about us (Liberals and Progressives)

I hope many people sit back and reflect upon what Feindgold's loss says about us and especially all of the progressives and liberals in Wisconsin.

I'm not talking about losing his service, but what is says about Democrats and Progressives and how we failed in keeping the one single man in office who fought every day for our most important stances, especially over the past ten years.

We should be reflecting on why should a politician like Feingold speak his mind against the grain of conventional wisdom when those he speaks the hardest for can't even reassure him of re-election.

Frankly, I don't want to hear about the money that was poured into his race, this, that or other whines. OUR voters failed this man. Our fellow Democrats and Progressives failed this man. Those who believe in harsh truth failed this man. He stuck his neck out for US - not the US - but US, Democrats and Progressives and we failed him. Yes, I failed him too. I should have paid closer attention to his race even though I am in Illinois. I would have gladly sent him a check. I thought it was impossible for him to actually lose. I thought our Democrats and Progressives in Wisconsin would cast the votes needed to send this man back to the Senate. But we did not.

We failed this man and we are much worse off than before.

When hearing of his loss to our nation.

Thank you, Russ for your Service to our country and especially for so often being a strong progressive voice.

deserve to lose.

If he is the standard bearer he is made out to be and the "progresives" are the force they claim to be then he should have had mountains of cash and support. That didnt really happen though.

He lost cause "progresives" amd other "Dems" couldnt be bothered to get out and vote. They were aparently too dissapointed to help the person that they think is one of their best reps.

Your check would not have saved him.

And we liberals and progressives have nothing to do with it. The race was run in Wisconsin, which has its own set of peculiarities and demographics and economic challenges and desire for "change" and misguided wish to "balance" the government. Wisconsin voters--and a whole buncha other stuff--are responsible for not re-electing him.

So don't feel guilty (except for thinking it was impossible for him to lose: the polls were saying this for a good 8 months). Unless you were a WIsconsin voter who failed to vote or voted against him, you have no blood on your hands.

GOTV for Feingold. You can only lead a horse to water and all. People gave their hearts - both in Wisconsin and from all over the country. The responsibility lies with those who didn't vote, just as you say. And when people say "they get what they deserve", well, we ALL pay with a loss like this. This defeat made me sadder than any of the others.

There are simply not enough Liberals and Progressives in this state to elect anyone to a statewide office. single handedly. Too many voters in the middle who might usually have voted for Feingold were pissed off by the situation in the country and Feingold took the hit. That's the way politics goes sometimes.

Is there any proof that the Liberals and Progressives here in Wisconsin did not overwhelmingly support Feingold? I'd love to see it.

I live in Wisconsin and have for over 50 years: no, OUR voters did no fail Feingold because it takes many more than simply Liberals and Progressives.

Russ was behind in the polls for a long time.

And you might say you don't want to talk about money - but he was outspent by a lot, and that definitely matters.

Plus, he never made that difference (his refusal to take lobbyist money) a central part of his campaign, when it was a big factor in how the race was going. It's also a positive selling point in a "Tea Party" political environment.

Which leads me to my final point:

DU NEEDS TO HAVE A FUNDRAISING EFFORT FOR LIBERAL CANDIDATES LIKE GRAYSON AND FEINGOLD. Other websites like Kos and Balloon-Juice regularly post ActBlue fundraising efforts on their site, and raise a lot of money. Here, we only raise money for... DU. That could be improved-upon.

I also sent a few other candidates money too. Just after getting a new job from being unemployed for over a year. Many people like me, despite wanting to help him, simply can't, and the system is working against candidates like Feingold and getting worse.

Consider:
1) or f'd up oligopoly corporate controlled press/media. It is arguably not talking about what what pols like Feingold does and doesn't give reasonable credit to his efforts. It is part of the distortion of his record.
2) the Citizen's United campaign that allowed a huge distorting ad campaign that the media haven't questioned adequately but instead are living off of is a big part of the problem too.
3) Organizations like the DSCC and DCCC when they are headed up with DLC folk like Rahm Emmanuel used to, aren't helping folks like Feingold as much as they should.
4) People are angry with an unprecedented horrible economic state that we are in, and the above first two items have contributed to people's voting rashly against incumbents without really studying what they are all about and what their record has been.
5) Damn University of Wisconsin fans the last two weeks have probably been distracted beating ranked football teams like #1 Ohio State and Iowa (which upset me having travelled to that game for a change to see it unfortunately). Probably haven't thought about trying to use these last two weeks to study the elections in Wisconsin the way they should have. I think you are seeing the net effect of this with the whole state voting a lot more as a red state than a blue state.

OK, I'm joking about #5, which still bugs me personally, but probably isn't the real reason why Wisconsin has f'd up.

I tink Feingold needs to adjust his political scope to to something now more national as opposed to just the people of Wisconsin. Wisconsin residents have shown that they can't be relied on to support his efforts, and I think there are many more around the country that appreciate his efforts moreso than those in Wisconsin have. Work with folks like Howard Dean and Alan Grayson now to craft a new progressive strategy for 2012, whether its running another presidential campaign or something else. If Obama's wise, he'll think about replacing Rahm Emmanuel with Feingold, or using Feingold in his administration in some other useful way to signal he's now moving more towards supporting his base rather than appease the Republicans any more. Otherwise perhaps a primary challenge would be most fitting in 2012.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

And *that* is on us.

I really don't like how we've been a punching bag in all of this.

I do not know all of the numbers out of Wisconsin, but here are some interesting findings by Michael Tomasky...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/michaeltomasky/2010/nov/03/us-midterm-elections-2010-turnout-says-a-lot


"By comparing these 2008 national exit polls and these from yesterday, both from CNN and asking essentially identical questions, we learn some useful things.

Certain figures weren't very different from 2008. The men/women split was the same over both elections, 47% male and 53% female. The "white-no college" category, which we roughly equate with the concept of the white working class, accounted for the same 39% of this year's vote as it did in 2008. Those voters did vote somewhat more Republican this time. They went for McCain by 58-40% and voted Republican this year by 62-35%.

Here, as far as I can see, are the three big top-line differences:
1. The 2008 electorate was 74% white, plus 13% black and 9% Latino. The 2010 numbers were 78, 10 and 8. So it was a considerably whiter electorate.
2. In 2008, 18-to-29-year-olds made up 18% and those 65-plus made up 16%. Young people actually outvoted old people. This year, the young cohort was down to 11%, and the seniors were up to a whopping 23% of the electorate. That's a 24-point flip.
3. The liberal-moderate-conservative numbers in 2008 were 22%, 44% and 34%. Those numbers for yesterday were 20%, 39% and 41%. A big conservative jump, but in all likelihood because liberals didn't vote in big numbers."

and that energy wasn't sustained.

i could say the same about some of the white working class votes which appear to have changed parties.

just that was enough to make the difference.

Something is seriously wrong.

It's not our fault. *WE* didn't fail. We're hurt and we gave blood, sweat, tears, money and votes. Nobody reading this on DU who is a liberal failed, so go lecture elsewhere.

Way to pour and rub the salt in our wounds.

I'm not trying to rub salt in anyone's wounds, especially the fine progressives and liberals from Wisconsin. I'm just trying to point out we really need to reflect upon ourselves and what this means nationwide to how we conduct business.

In our elective politics with ever increasing craven politicians, why would any Democrat act like Feingold in the future?

I don't think I exaggerate his importance to the left at all for all he has done these last ten years. He has been the lone voice out there in the wilderness.

So it seems pretty obvious to me that Dems need to re-tool what we are doing and if we can't tolerate some self-examination, then look out.

I get that it's not *ME*, but *US*, and you're blaming us. And as it's been explained in detail, that's completely untrue, unfair and shitty.

In my OP I blamed all of US. And we are all to blame. With more data coming in, it is apparent more could have been done to kept Feingold in his seat.

You are just picking out a small part of my entire point and conflating it to mean one thing. And I am here right now telling you that that was not my point (to just blame WI Progressives). Don't know how much clearer than I can be than that. ALL Dems failed this man. ALL.

I knew this was going to happen, because it was already happening last week!

Libs and progressives didn't lose this election for Feingold in my opinion. He lost for several reasons:

1. Wisconsin as a state is moving to the right as are many midwestern areas because of unemployment.

2. Obama and this Admin let Feingold and others like Grayson swing in the wind. They never did support our liberal left politicians and if you don't get smiled on by the PTB, you are fucked.

3. Too many centrists just swung right this year. There's a strong anti-incumbent streak and some of the more uneducated centrists just went with the flow.

4. The younger voter has a definite enthusiasm gap and weren't motivated like they were before. That's not "our" fault, it's Obama's fault again if you ask me. He needed to do more to ignite people and fire them up. Instead he's been all bi-partisan - that doesn't play well.

It's certainly not the fault of libs and prorgressives who are the most politically savvy and understood the stakes!

The blaming of liberals here is maddening, assholish and just plain dumb.

is even more extreme!

No way is Obama to blame. at. all. Nuh, uh, its all libs and progressives doncha know!

since hindsight is 20/20, what could Dems have done differently to get that five percent to the polls or to early voting? From what Tomasky put forth, that margin plus more was present in the voters that did not show up in 2010 but did in 2008.

So, if we can't stand back and reflect upon what could of been done more for Feingold because it is too painful or too insulting, then how do we ever hope to stop this in the future?

well theres a statement that doesnt wash. I wish it did but politically savvy isnt screaming how bad your guys are doing for two years then expecting the public to come out and vote for them.

or volunteer for him?

Years ago with a group of like minded people I got to watch a video from a conference of an opposing group putting forth their tactics and strategy of how to take us to the woodshed.

While watching this inside video, the group I was with started ranting and raving and more or less throwing stuff at the screen. They started ignoring the inside message we were getting instead of figuring out how to take this information and become better.

That is what I am trying to suggest in this thread. We need to look at what happened to Feingold and figure how it happened and what we can do to stop it because politicians will not stick their necks out for us if we don't do more.

There is always more to be done but if we can't take the examination part of it, how can we ever find out what those things are?

I did not only point toward Progressives. I included ALL Dems.

And like I mentioned, even though hindsight is 20/20, up until election day, what extra was being done by Dems for Feingold? Were the voter rolls looked over for missed voters who voted in 2008? Were people driven to the polls?

I mean, we all know that voting will be off in the mid-terms, but we all know what Feingold did regarding the Patriot Act, the wars, the Bush Administration, et cetera. He was out there in the wilderness and when it came time, the Dems and really, the centrist and establishment Dems, really failed this man.

We have to examine why so we can move forward.

perfectly expected response in the beginning stages of loss. however, to cling to this path leads to madness.

not everyone votes and not everyone can think their way out of a paper bag. humans are herd animals that are as easily prodded by emotions as by cattle prods. the mob, the stampede, is a force of nature once stirred up.

to take up a mantle of blame for this may seem noble, but truly this is more of a stage of grief. now, to stay in this mode and try to carry this grief as some sort of martyr's cross... that will become an act of self-indulgent emotional masturbation. just let the process of grief go through its stages. that's healthier.

if we don't examine the problem, we won't learn of it and the proper diagnosis for it. Burying our heads in the sand and wringing our hands together for a short time does no good unless it pushes us to learn something.

And that is the end result of my OP. That we need to reflect on what his loss says about US so we can change, learn and prevent this from happening again.

reflection does better with macro analysis, searching for narrative patterns.

from what can be assessed the progressives are doing fine. apparently it takes a herculean level of money AND an epic recession AND a party leadership so vacillating and self-destructive to weaken the populace enough to be suckered into voting away their firebrands. that's a good sign.

the only way to carry this self-flagellating narrative would require hyper-fixation on this race REMOVED from any larger context. in essence, it's a pretty untenable narrative in the face of reality. and thus the most charitable thing to say about this mea culpa narrative is that it must well up from a stage of the grieving process.

it's OK to grieve. there's always another election when Feingold can run again. the greater import is already quite apparent. :7

Unlimited corporate financing for his opponent and the utter failure to do what was promised are far more significant factors in the two progressives that were expelled at considerable cost.

But I'm sure this spin will continue to be the major talking point for the next month or two.

Stick to watching your show Fantasy Island on cable tv....

so there's nothing that can be done.

with what happened to Feingold and unwilling to ask why or examine why or what we ALL could have done differently and seem content with just burying your head in the sand instead of honestly asking, "what just happened"....well, don't know what to tell you.


There are things we all could have done. From left wing magazines suggesting more strongly to sending him money to a more effective GOTV effort.


To be able to sit back in a chair and not be disgusted or concerned with our brethren and what happened here is not a luxury I think we can afford to have.

This lone man put himself out in front for US. And not to ask "what this says about the left and Dems" is ridiculous.

quite far enough up the Party's ass.

He was a high value target for 'both' parties overlords and he was cut loose. Nobody that matters in DC was sorry to see him lose because he was unreliable, having those principle things was just too inconvenient. Both his republik replacement and the shill they put up in six years will be far more compliant.

As for putting himself out front, this is what I remember most, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6wl_86qnsI">failure to stand up when it mattered most.

You can remember that and hold grudges for that if you want to but from what I recall any objection would have been clearly for theatrics and absolutely meaningless. I'm not interested in going back and doing the research for the claim that all it would have taken was for one Senator to make an objection, but I do recall it would have been pointless for some sort of reason (from what I recall, all it would have taken to render such objection overruled was someone from the house to make a motion. It was something simple like that).

But even Gore didn't want them to do anything.