PPP: Russ Feingold Poised For Comeback, Could Top Scott Walker Next Year

[ProSense]

PPP: Russ Feingold Poised For Comeback, Could Top Scott Walker Next Year

Former Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) fell victim to nationwide Republican momentum in 2010, but a poll out Tuesday showed that the progressive champion could be in a strong position for a political comeback in the Badger State.

Fifty-three percent of Wisconsin voters said they have a favorable opinion of Feingold, according to the latest survey from Democratic-leaning Public Policy Polling, while 37 percent said they have an unfavorable opinion of the former three-term senator.

The poll indicated that Feingold could get the last laugh on the Republican who ousted him in the 2010 midterms. In a hypothetical 2016 Senate matchup, 52 percent said they would vote for Feingold over Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI), who picked up 42 percent support.

Moreover, Feingold fared better than any Democrat tested in hypothetical matchups against Gov. Scott Walker (R-WI), who will be up for re-election next year. Feingold edged Walker in the poll 49 percent to 47 percent. Walker topped every other Democrat tested in the poll. Feingold has not given an indication yet if he will challenge Walker in 2014.

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/ppp-russ-feingold-poised-for-comeback-could-top

Wisconsin needs to get rid of both of them.

[EOTE]

1. You've got a problem with Russ Feingold?

Being one of the last remaining true progressives, that doesn't surprise me one bit.

[ProSense]

3. ?

Both of them = Johnson and Walker.

[EOTE]

6. The article headline mentions Walker and Feingold.

So it's fairly easy to read what you say as wanting to get rid of Feingold.

[ProSense]

8. Maybe you

"The article headline mentions Walker and Feingold. So it's fairly easy to read what you say as wanting to get rid of Feingold."

...should read beyond the headline. Feingold isn't currently an elected official. How on earth is "fairly easy to read" the statement as wanting to get rid of Feingold?

[EOTE]

9. Because "getting rid of" doesn't always mean voting out of office.

I read the article and still thought you were referring to Feingold. Given the lack of content to your comment, it was easy to do.

[ProSense]

12. What?

Why the hell would I want to get rid of an un-elected official? What the hell does that even mean?

Clearly, you're harboring some issues that are unrelated to the point. I mean, even if Feingold was an elected official, why on earth would you think I would want to get rid of him?

[EOTE]

13. Because I've noted that you seem to have a problem with progressives.

Or anyone towing the progressive line. Because progressives often realize that neither democrats nor republicans offer a stand on the liberal side of things and realize that both parties can be all too similar at times.

[ProSense]

15. Well,

"Because I've noted that you seem to have a problem with progressives. Or anyone towing the progressive line. Because progressives often realize that neither democrats nor republicans offer a stand on the liberal side of things and realize that both parties can be all too similar at times. "

..given your interpretation of the OP, maybe you what you've "noted" is just as flawed. I repeat, clearly, you're harboring some issues that are unrelated to the point.

[EOTE]

17. So you have no issues with democrats who refuse to act as republicans?

Those democrats who believe that faux democrats need to be called out for not standing true to their ideals? Those that understand that it's better to call out those fake democrats rather than having the party move even further to the right? I've noted many instances over the years where that was the case, and that's why it seemed fairly clear to me as to what you were referring.

[ProSense]

18. Try to work out your issues without involving me.

Your issues have nothing to do with the OP.

[HERVEPA]

14. Totally clear she meant Walker and Johnson from reading the article.

Last edited Tue Feb 26, 2013, 05:26 PM - Edit history (1)

reading it any other way makes no sense at all.

[Cha]

19. Spot on, HERVEPA.. except ProSense is

a SHE!

[HERVEPA]

31. Doh! (thanks)

[warrior1]

2. why didn't he fucking run last time

WI could have probably gotten rid of him then. I do hope he runs this next time.

[iandhr]

35. I don't think he is interested in being Governor.

I think he wants he Senate seat back.

[Fuddnik]

50. Fuck that.

I want him to be the next President.

He was my first choice in 2008, until he decided not to run.

[iandhr]

51. He has to want to be President first.

Though I love idea.

[xmas74]

56. But if the party calls..

I don't think he wanted to run in the recall. Who could blame him?

2014- new election and a chance to oust Walker in a regular election. Feingold could pull it off.

[iandhr]

58. Just as long as we have someone who will knock of Johnson in 2016

Thats still a long way off.

[iandhr]

59. Walker is at 48%

Against the other tested candidates. These other candidates have no name recognition. Even if Russ don't run Walker isn't unbeatable.

[Still Sensible]

4. Discouraging that he only edges out Walker in the poll

by a couple points--no doubt within the margin of error.

[stevenleser]

22. Yes, if I were advising him, I would say to run for senate. That seems a much surer thing.

As much as I want Walker to be thrown out of office on his backside...

[Drunken Irishman]

26. Yup. Walker seems unbeatable, sadly.

Run for senate. Don't be milked into running against Walker and losing and then having your entire political career essentially end.

[iandhr]

53. Remember 2014 is still a long way off.

A lot can happen between then and now. Its WAY to early to concede defeat.

[City Lights]

5. Anyone know if he's interested in running?

I sure hope he is!

[Wellstone ruled]

7. If you hail from Wisconsin and know

the Feingolds,then you would under stand. Russ,let's cut the crap,either take a position or get the hell out of way. Can't win elections on your reputation alone,you have to get out there and kick ass and take names.

[patrice]

11. K&R "kick ass and (LOUDLY!) take names" nt

[patrice]

10. Dear Russ Feingold, please get *A*L*L* of Labor to the table and by that I mean SEIU AND IWW too! nt

[JNelson6563]

16. I hope he runs and announces soon!

Go Russ! Good riddance Walker!

Nothing would make me happier and I'm not even in WI!

Julie

[HereSince1628]

20. If Feingold wanted the governorship he could have run in the special election

Not standing up during the recall suggests to me he really isn't interested in a state level position.

I'd love to see Johnson removed, but these numbers are really early.

For a whole bunch of tcheez-party it's already become Russ-who?

Expect them tol jump on whatever negative ads AFP or other ALEC/Koch group fronts for Johnson.

[Cha]

21. Good News, ProSense.. I hope Wisconsin gets rid of BOTH of THEM..

too.. in their Respective races!

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

23. I hope it's Russ v. Walker

Johnson is a dead man walking. He's up for re-election in 2016, which means he won't have low turn-out on his side. And he has another three years to thoroughly and utterly embarrass the state. Just about any Democrat will be able to beat him.

Walker will be, I think, I tougher nut to crack. But I believe Russ can do it.

[graham4anything]

24. The article itself headline is bias against democratic party

It continues a big lie-
it says the republican momentum.

the republicans did NOT win in 2010. Those who protested and sat on their hands and those that didn't realize they had to vote midterm caused democratic voters to not come to the polls in enough numbers to win.

The republicans did not get a major vote count. They won by no one showing up at the polls.

BTW, is Russ going to get back in the arena, being that he whined and quit to form a lobby group.
Why didn't he run last time?

What makes one sure he will climb back into the ring?
Him and Bill Bradley to think of two that did just that.
(Bradley could have beaten Christie).

[ProSense]

25. Guess what

"the republicans did NOT win in 2010. Those who protested and sat on their hands and those that didn't realize they had to vote midterm caused democratic voters to not come to the polls in enough numbers to win"

...Wisconsin's Senator is Ron Johnson and its Governor is Scott Walker. Focus on that reality. I mean, it's not like you can claim the election was stolen or decided by the SCOTUS.

"BTW, is Russ going to get back in the arena, being that he whined and quit to form a lobby group. Why didn't he run last time?"

I'm trying to reconcile that statement with the title of your post: "The article itself headline is bias against democratic party"

[graham4anything]

27. I am on your side here.

my complaint is with the MSM bias against the democratic party, in their article's first sentence. NOT with your post or the rest of the article

With that first sentence-
there was not a bigger than usual number of republican voters in 2010
there was a smaller number than usual of democratic voters

for some reason, democratic voters vote less in off year than in presidential, so the lesser number of republican voters, who vote in every election, are enough to win

I am not claiming scotus or the election was stolen(NOR do I ever say that anyhow, my beef normally is with 3rd parties and the Nader meme that one should stay home, both parties are the same).

As for Feingold and Bradley, both disappeared from the arena, when both might have won the last election they were needed in.

There is no guarantee Russ will run at all. As he was not one to rely on last time.

Why these people leave the arena I don't know.

Protester voters cause democratic candidates to lose, throwing the race to the republican.

[ProSense]

28. The title

"my complaint is with the MSM bias against the democratic party, in their article's first sentence. NOT with your post or the rest of the article "

...is from a blog post at TPM, not the MSM.

Still, I'm not seeing how railing against "MSM bias" toward the Democratic Party coupled with your railing against Feingold has anything to do with being on my "side."

"As for Feingold and Bradley, both disappeared from the arena, when both might have won the last election they were needed in.

There is no guarantee Russ will run at all. As he was not one to rely on last time.

Why these people leave the arena I don't know. "

Who cares? If he decides to run, and the OP shows he has a good chance of winning, that is great news for the Democratic Party.

[graham4anything]

29. He could have won last time.

He needs to decide early so if he doesn't run, someone else with either a big name, or a massive war chest can get the job done.

(in other words, Russ will need to SOGOTC so to say).

Paul Wellstone would not have left the arena voluntarily in the first place, and Russ likes to consider himself the 2nd Paul Wellstone.

and TPM is repeating a fake spin on 2010. There was no momentum for the republicans that had the democratic voters come out and voted, the republicans in all those states would have lost and it could have been avoided in the first place.
(same as 1968,1980,1984, 1988, 2000).

Hopefully 2014 will not be the same.

[ProSense]

30. He didn't run last time.

"He needs to decide early so if he doesn't run, someone else with either a big name, or a massive war chest can get the job done."

What exactly is stopping someone else from declaring now? Who do you have in mind, and wouldn't the need to "decide early" also apply to someone else?

"Paul Wellstone would not have left the arena voluntarily in the first place, and Russ likes to consider himself the 2nd Paul Wellstone."

Oh my!

[graham4anything]

32. Look at the results-Democratic voters came out in 2008 but at least 12% less in 2010.

wiki-
Gov. Doyle when he won got 1,139,115 votes. in 2010, Barrett only got barely over 1 million voters to show up and vote for him. Had all of Gov. Doyle's voters came to the polls, he would have won.

Wisconsin gubernatorial election, 2010[41]
Party Candidate Votes Percentage
Republican Scott Walker 1,128,941 52.25%
Democratic Tom Barrett 1,004,303 46.48%

Wisconsin gubernatorial recall election, 2012[90]
Party Candidate Votes Percentage
Republican Scott Walker 1,334,450 53.1%
Democratic Tom Barrett 1,162,785 46.3%

NOTE2-had the democratic voters in 2012 come out in 2010, Barrett would have defeated Walker.
Barrett only got 1.004 million in 2010, had 1.163 in 2012.

[ProSense]

34. What does that have to do with Feingold's decision to run in 2014 or 2016? n/t

[graham4anything]

38. It means the voters need to come out to the polls and not be either lazy or protesting

a common theme in 2010 was that people stayed home in some misguided protest nationwide
allowing Scott, Walker, Christie and even others to win.

Feingold didn't run in the recall. That was the point I was making.

He should have, could have but didn't.

Unless you are saying he isn't that popular that he would have done worse than Barrett.

In 2004 he got 1,632,697 55
however, in 2010 only 1,020,860 (60% less).

so either he is or isn't that popular, and if he is the 2004 popular, then it shows how many voters stayed home in 2010 and 2012 in the gov. race.
I don't like the 1st line in the TPM article as it was not republican momentum at all, but democratic faux protest and laziness.
(this is combining both points I made.)

[ProSense]

39. You're conflating issues.

"It means the voters need to come out to the polls and not be either lazy or protesting"

That has nothing to do with his decision. If he decides to run, yes, voters will have to show up at the polls in order for him to win, but this is only the decision-making stage.

"Feingold didn't run in the recall. That was the point I was making.

He should have, could have but didn't.

Unless you are saying he isn't that popular that he would have done worse than Barrett."

It was his decision, and that still has nothing to do with his decision going forward.

Your being upset that he decided not to run in 2010 has nothing to do with the point of the OP.

[graham4anything]

40. I hope he runs and wins.

When you see me avidly wanting Hillary Clinton, it is because when she lost, she didn't whine and leave the arena.
She did it the old fashioned way. She got back on the bicycle and bettered the world, the nation and her standing and earned my vote.

So yes, it all is together in one issue.

I do hope he wins by running and winning. He can only win if he runs.

And he had the voters in number to win had those same voters voted in the recall
(whcih yes, I know, he did not run but could have, should have).

[ProSense]

41. Well,

"When you see me avidly wanting Hillary Clinton, it is because when she lost, she didn't whine and leave the arena.
She did it the old fashioned way. She got back on the bicycle and bettered the world, the nation and her standing and earned my vote.'

...it helps that she was appointed SOS. You're conflating being appointed with running for office, and also taking a shot at Feingold.

[graham4anything]

43. You keep missing the point

by doing that, by staying in the arena, Hillary increased the # of voters and her favorability.

The important number is having one more vote than the other party does come election night after the polls close.

I do hope the democratic candidate wins. Walker is awful, Scott in Florida is awful,
perry in Texas is awful. Christie in NJ is awful. All should not have won in the first place.

[ProSense]

46. Wait

"You keep missing the point by doing that, by staying in the arena, Hillary increased the # of voters and her favorability."

...when did the point become Hillary?

"The important number is having one more vote than the other party does come election night after the polls close. "

It's like you're having a conversation with yourself. Yes, winning requires getting more votes.

Reminder: The OP is a about a poll that shows Feingold in a good position against two Republicans. Feingold hasn't said he's going to run, but the numbers bode well for him if he decides to.

[graham4anything]

48. The point is good candidates leaving the arena to go into private not public biz

as the NY lotto says "you gotta be in it to win it"

Hopefully he will be in it and win it.
Which is the whole point.

[iandhr]

33. I think I would want him back in the Senate.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

36. He *could* make a comeback and if we VOTE in the midterms. If not, it's all for naught.

Thanks, ProSense!!

[Javaman]

37. Russ is a heck of a guy.

I met him a few years ago and he's the real deal. I certainly hope he runs again.

[WI_DEM]

42. Wonderful--but he's not going to run for governor.

[Cha]

49. Do you think he might run for anything

again, WI_DEM?

[HereSince1628]

55. When Feingold came back from the senate he said he wanted to do other things...

he set up fundraising to support a 'progressive' movement, he was supported. He got a job in the Marquette Law School and he wrote.

He really didn't do much publicly during the "budget repair" protests or the recall.

All that gave me the impression that if he's interested into doing anything in politics, it's not running for a state office or leading a state movement.

[Cha]

61. thanks HereSince1628

[HomeboyHombre]

44. Where do I send money? This is great news if Finegold follows up

and runs for Gov.

Finegold and Franken . . . that'd be pretty sweet.

[AzDar]

45. Russ!

[valerief]

47. Any 99%er would have to have swiss cheese for brains to choose Walker over Feingold. nt

[Rider3]

52. I thought Feingold did a great job.

I have no clue why you'd want to get rid of him. Read his book -- he's for the average citizen!

[Enrique]

54. Feingold-Lewis 2016

Russ Feingold and Chicago Teachers Union president Karen Lewis

[upaloopa]

57. What he'll is wrong in WI? Walker beats

any other Dem?
I guess some people get off on suffering.
It hurts the rest of us too.

[TroglodyteScholar]

60. We haven't had our fill of bullshit yet, apparently.

Another bowl, please!

[loudsue]

62. I don't understand Wisconsinites. How could they possibly like Walker?

After all he put the state through?