Educate me: WHY Russ Feingold?

[wyldwolf]

Lots of threads on him lately.

So far, he seems to be a fine candidate for President.

But why would he be better than other names being mentioned?

Sell me on him!

[stray cat]

1. I like Russ because I trust him.

Russ is a populist and his roots are more with the common people than with big business and corporations. He talks like a normal person and he really talks about issues in a straightforward way. I think he will come across as regular person to alot of voters and I think that it is important. He is willing to take stands that other politicians won't - to me that sounds like integrity. For example, he stood alone against the Patriot Act because as he says - He was the only one who actually read it. He also will initiate bills across party lines to try to accomplish things that are important. He and Cheffey tried to get the senate to reinstate the "paygo" law which meant Bush would have to show how he was going to get the money for more taxbreaks for the wealthy. They actually came close and it has the republicans on record for voting against fiscal discipline. Feingold is a maverick in the best since of the word.

Russ is also a fiscal hawk - I personally like that.

I think Feingold is a progressive who could do well in a large section of America because he is a populist who speaks for responsible government and also appears to be a regular guy.

[MollyStark]

2. He is one of the true populists and has proved it in the Senate

I have a problem with running a senator again, but I would happily back Feingold.

[quaoar]

3. I don't know if he is the right candidate

but I was impressed with his two trips to Greenville, Alabama.

[solinvictus]

4. Reasons I like Senator Feingold..

1) He opposed the Patriot Act.
2) He has directly addressed issues of outsourcing and our diminishing industrial base while connecting them directly to rampant poverty.
3) During the debate over renewing the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994, Senator Feingold looked at it objectively and decided, along with his constituents, that the ban had no tangible effects on crime rates and was bad legislation.
4) Feingold works from the bottom up, meaning he addresses the concerns of working Americans before corporate interests.

[EndElectoral]

5. We need someone who can speak with passion, intelligence, values and tough

Kerry lacked passion, but had intelligence. I'm not sure but that Feingold would not be a repeat of Kerry.

We have had four Dem Prsidents in the last 50 years.

Bill Clinton, a helluva speaker although sometimes rambled too long. Very bright even though I dsiagreed with NAFTA and his failrue to really fight for national health care and the Lewinsky debacle. Clinton was crushed at the end due to the values issue since he appeared a hypocrite philandering and then misleading about it. He lost too much credibility. It hurt Gore by association. Although Gore was lampooned by Saturday Night Live as boring, as Kerry was lampooned by Mad TV and Sat. Night Live as boring. so like it or not we need a dynamic speaker.

Jimmy Carter, probably the most decent man to ever run for office in my lifetime. Victimized by appearing weak in Iran. Frankly, he got all those hostages out alive, with only losing his patience once. A one term president because he lacked Reagan's charisma, charm and appearance of telling it like it is as well as fiscal issues of the time. Great on values, and intelligent, but not a charismatic speaker and did not appear tough.

Lyndon Johnson, basically inherited the position due to Kennedy's murder. Some great reforms, Medicare, Equal Rights Amendment, but stubborness on Vietnam and turmoil on the streets did him in. Not a charismatic man at all. A mess despite getting through very strong values legislation. Crafty rather than intelligent, and stubborn rather than tough.

John Kennedy, shot down in his time. A dynamic speaker, passionate, intelligent, tough - Cuban Missle Crisis, and pushing for values legislation. Also a war hero. And good looking to boot. The perfect candidate. Kerry had some of his credentials but lacked the charisma and passion.

Personally, I like Boxer and Clark. Boxer has all those features and thinks quickly on her feet. Clark has solid military credentials which make up for Boxer's perceived weakness in defense. Both speak well, and Boxer is a tiger. She's have annihilated Bush in those debates.

We also have to anticipate who we'll be running against. Jeb or McCain or Santorum. My guess is McCain and he will be tough. If it is McCain, we're going to need Clark. If it is one of the others than Boxer should get the top ticket.

[leesa]

6. I like him too, although I have disagreed with some of his votes

Watch him questioning someone on a panel sometime. He does not shy away from confronting anyone.

I agree with the poster who said she does not like the idea of running a Senator again though. I think as a group, they have done a lot of damage to this country.

[ulysses]

7. he's a damn good progressive

and not one easy to pigeonhole. I agree with much of what others have posted above.

[mattclearing]

8. He voted against the Patriot Act, for one.

The only senator to do so, which speaks volumes to me about his personal commitment to the real Constitution, not to be confused with that thing that Republicans claim enables them to sell guns to anyone and give presidential elections away to losers.

[Zhade]

9. Kick for responses

Kick