There was a nice little exchange going on in the comments section of the "It's Official" post directly below, so I think this is a post worthy of a quick follow up. First, the picture I paint of Russ Feingold as the Democratic nominee for President should be qualified a little bit. Feingold does face numerous hurdles before he gets to 2007. First, he's the Junior Senator from Wisconsin. That is a role that makes it a little bit more difficult for him to acquire the high profile needed to become the Democratic nominee for President. Second, Feingold's homespun, grass roots style works well in Wisconsin, but can it translate to the national level? Third, he is a very liberal senator. Fourth, the Democratic party is such a mess right now that it seems that only the biggest demagogue can make it through their primaries. It is not a sure thing that he will even end up running, let alone be able to capture the nomination-far from it, in fact. The one thing that concerns me is that the default position of Republicans in Wisconsin has been to underestimate Feingold, and here's why it concerns me that national Republicans will do the same.
Feingold and McCain. McCain and Feingold. Both have ambitions to become President. Both seem to enjoy working together. Both have a built in mechanism to keep their name out in the press. As Owen at Boots and Sabers points out, they are working on new campaign finance bill. They may believe in this bill, but it also serves to keep McCain-Feingold on everybody's lips for another couple of election cycles. This helps Feingold maintain his national identity and overcome that little junior Senator from Wisconsin problem. As for his homespun, grass roots style, I think that is the root of why Republicans underestimate him, but it is effective. I consider Ann Althouse to be a pretty reliable representative of the "middle", or those voters who aren't straight ticketers. She's already on Feingold's band wagon. (Read why here). As for Feingold's liberalism, he's not a Kerry liberal. He's more of a classic liberal who breaks party lines on "principle", and that is something the average voter respects. And as for the nature of the Democratic party, the war for the heart of that party has only just begun. Howard Dean looks to become the DNC chair, but don't think that means the party is going to hell in a hand basket. Hillary is tracking hard right, Feingold's playing classic liberalism, and Dean, with everything he represents, is about to be put in a position where everything he represents can be repudiated from within the Democratic Party and with Republican help from the outside. The Democratic party is going to look very different in four years.
Now don't take this as me being a Feingold supporter. What I am saying is that if you are conservative and/or a Republican, put your first impressions of Feingold away and re-examine him. Otherwise we may have an unpleasant surprise on our hands come 2008.
1 comment:
The simple fact is, he's a liberal senator who has never seen a tx hike he didn't like. I would like to see him run because it would be the first time he will face (presumably) a quality candidate with a good, well funded campaign. Michels, while being a sound candidate, ran a terrible campaign. I think if he would have been better funded and not disappeared in the month before the election, he would have made it a much closer race.
If Feingold runs, I doubt he would escape the primary and he would be beaten up on a national level, thus making it easier to defeat him in 2010. (I am also curious to see how he will maintain his "maverick" status and also be a deputy whip for his party. Doesn't make a whole lotta sense to me.
Post a Comment