Skip to main content

View Diary: Russ Feingold on MSNBC (21 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Me 2 (none)
    I disagree (see my post below).

    Richardson is a total centrist and now he has that "lied about baseball" thing going for him.  Wonderful.  People here will attack the DLC and then put up Richardson, who immediately after the 2004 election stood with dem Governors and spoke about the need to move to the center in order to win.


    Point for Point:

    1. He's a Senator - they don't win.  They have no record of accomplishments to run on that governors do.

    That's only if he refuses to discuss his senate accomplishments (McCain Feingold campaign finance reform, for one) like Kerry did.  Bush didn't have any real accomplishments as Governor, but he got away with lying about it.  The problem is bad campaigning, not being a senator.

    2.  His family situation will be harped on endlessly.  The right wing will paint him as not sharing "our" values in respecting the sanctity of marriage.

    Only if we let them!!!! Why the fuck are we so afraid of these guys?  They weren't afraid we'd paint their guy as a whistle-ass!  Only the most sanctimonious asshole actually thinks being divorced shows a lack of morals.  Why would we allow them to say this about our guy?  We sure are scaredy cats.  And incompetent if we can't diffuse this issue as it should be.

    3.  His religion will not play well in a lot of red states other than Florida.

    Now this is just sad.  What can I say?  Joementum shared the ticket that got the most dem votes up to that point in history.  

    4. He comes across as being 'ultra-liberal'.  And unfortunately, that label still has negative connotations.  We need to get a Democratic president in the White House first who can then rehabilitate the liberal label (what Howard Dean said he would have done if he won).  

    Again, it only has negative connotations because we let it.  Liberal is a good word and a good thing to be.  Let's remind them of all the things they have because of liberals, like social security and weekends and livable wages.  Sounds to me like you want us to be afraid of our own shadow (again) and run away from anything remotely left (again) and pick a candidate who rides the centrist fence (again).  Nice strategy, doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome.

    5.  His stand on campaign donations.  He refuses to take large campaign donations, which is quite admirable.  But when he runs for President, he's going to need these large donors.  So his option is to a) take their money, in which case he'll be accused of being a hypocrite; or b) not take the money in which case the Republican opponent will have a daunting war chest and outspend him and just kill him on the airwaves.  Not very enviable options.  

    If you will recall, Howard Dean raised millions with donations averaging under $100.  I went to Feingold's site and couldn't find where he refused to take large donations.  He is against unlimited soft money donations (that come via the party, not directly to his campaign) and wants to change the 527 regs.  This isn't a reason not to nominate someone.  This is a reason to work harder to get him elected, if he's who we want.

    •  Well put (none)
      Have a four on me.

      The whole "Senators can't win" thing really bugs me. What it really means is that candidates who aren't terribly inspiring public speakers don't tend to win. Now, as it happens, a lot of Senators tend to be uninspiring public speakers, particularly if they've got safe seats. And being in the Senate may mean that you speak in very precise and legalistic langauge, which doesn't work very well on the stump (as seen with Kerry). But, it does not follow that ALL Senators are automatically like this. Having seen Feingold speak, he comes across as a regular guy with good ideas, not a slick politician or a boring tightass.

      As for campaign finance issues, a Feingold candidacy would be a crucial step in moving the Democrats away from big money and corporate control. While Democrats have used those connections to stay financially competetive with Republicans, it came at a cost of weakening the party's populist roots. Without an economcially populist message, we will not be able to win over socially conservative working class voters. And without undue corporate influence, Feingold can run a credible populist campaign and win over voters who oftentimes vote against their economic interests.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (129)
  • Community (55)
  • Memorial Day (31)
  • Culture (29)
  • Environment (26)
  • Republicans (21)
  • Civil Rights (20)
  • Media (18)
  • Rescued (18)
  • Labor (17)
  • Education (17)
  • Elections (17)
  • Science (17)
  • Bernie Sanders (16)
  • GOP (16)
  • Law (16)
  • Climate Change (15)
  • 2016 (15)
  • Marriage Equality (14)
  • Racism (13)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site