Feingold for President?

Feingold for President?

The crowd at the Democratic Party’s annual dinner in western Wisconsin’s Vernon County was large, loud and longing for a little partisan passion.

Far from feeling beat down by the November presidential election result, the more than 100 rural Democrats who gathered in small city of Viroqua this week were ready to fight against the war in Iraq, against economic policies that favor big business over working people and family farmers and against the warping of the public discourse by a media that is more concerned about Scott Peterson’s conviction than the future of Social Security.

Unfortunately, they couldn’t find many reflections of their grassroots passion in the current leadership of the Democratic Party. The sense that the time had come for a fresh face was palpable.

Copy Link
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky
Pocket
Email

The crowd at the Democratic Party’s annual dinner in western Wisconsin’s Vernon County was large, loud and longing for a little partisan passion.

Far from feeling beat down by the November presidential election result, the more than 100 rural Democrats who gathered in small city of Viroqua this week were ready to fight against the war in Iraq, against economic policies that favor big business over working people and family farmers and against the warping of the public discourse by a media that is more concerned about Scott Peterson’s conviction than the future of Social Security.

Unfortunately, they couldn’t find many reflections of their grassroots passion in the current leadership of the Democratic Party. The sense that the time had come for a fresh face was palpable.

When I met with the Vernon County activists – most of whom were Democrats but some of whom were interested Greens and independents – their response to my suggestion that the county needs a real opposition party was immediate and enthusiastic.

These rural Democrats even had a suggestion for the who should lead that opposition. And it wasn’t Hillary Clinton or John Edwards. When I was describing what a serious opposition party would stand for at this moment in history–starting with an absolute rejection of the war in Iraq and empire building and going on to a passionate defense of civil liberties and a willingness to stand up to multinational corporations–a bearded fellow in the crowd shouted, “We’ve got someone who can do it–the only senator who voted against the Patriot Act: Russ Feingold.”

The crowd cheered.

And they aren’t alone. While it might be predictable that Wisconsin Democrats would be excited by the prospect of their just-reelected senator seeking the presidency, the buzz about a possible Feingold for President campaign in 2008 is growing nationally.

Hotline, the online bible of inside-the-beltway political junkies, just featured a commentary in which the editors suggested that Wisconsin’s junior senator – who has been outspoken in his criticism not just of the Patriot Act but of the war in Iraq and the corporate free-trade agenda — could be a serious contender for the Democratic presidential nomination. Noting that, against serious opposition, Feingold ran more than 140,000 votes ahead of Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry in Wisconsin, a source told Hotline, “He just accomplished an impressive victory in a heartland swing state in a year that wasn’t so kind to (Democrats).” The source went on to suggest that Feingold “will be looked at as a new voice for the party as it moves forward.”

Over at www.mydd.com, a popular Democratic website, political writer Chris Bowers observes, “Feingold is in an odd position. Even though he has won three terms in the US Senate, he actually is still known as a “reformer” and an “outsider,” due in no small part to the constant repetition of the “McCain-Feingold” legislation in the national media. Because of this reputation, among all Democratic Senators, except perhaps (newly-elected Illinois Sen. Barack) Obama, I think he would be the best bet to capture the non-ideological reformers that I believe are a key to future Democratic success.”

The interest in a Feingold candidacy has even sparked the development of a “Russ Feingold for President” Internet forum.

So will Feingold run? The man is not without ambition. He thought about seeking the presidency in 2004, but backed off before the contest really got started.

As the jockeying begins for 2008–and, make no mistake, the jockeying has begun–it is a safe bet that Feingold will again ponder a run. And with the unsolicited support that he’s getting from his home state and elsewhere, he might well be inspired this time to do more than just explore a candidacy.

Support independent journalism that does not fall in line

Even before February 28, the reasons for Donald Trump’s imploding approval rating were abundantly clear: untrammeled corruption and personal enrichment to the tune of billions of dollars during an affordability crisis, a foreign policy guided only by his own derelict sense of morality, and the deployment of a murderous campaign of occupation, detention, and deportation on American streets. 

Now an undeclared, unauthorized, unpopular, and unconstitutional war of aggression against Iran has spread like wildfire through the region and into Europe. A new “forever war”—with an ever-increasing likelihood of American troops on the ground—may very well be upon us.  

As we’ve seen over and over, this administration uses lies, misdirection, and attempts to flood the zone to justify its abuses of power at home and abroad. Just as Trump, Marco Rubio, and Pete Hegseth offer erratic and contradictory rationales for the attacks on Iran, the administration is also spreading the lie that the upcoming midterm elections are under threat from noncitizens on voter rolls. When these lies go unchecked, they become the basis for further authoritarian encroachment and war. 

In these dark times, independent journalism is uniquely able to uncover the falsehoods that threaten our republic—and civilians around the world—and shine a bright light on the truth. 

The Nation’s experienced team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers understands the scale of what we’re up against and the urgency with which we have to act. That’s why we’re publishing critical reporting and analysis of the war on Iran, ICE violence at home, new forms of voter suppression emerging in the courts, and much more. 

But this journalism is possible only with your support.

This March, The Nation needs to raise $50,000 to ensure that we have the resources for reporting and analysis that sets the record straight and empowers people of conscience to organize. Will you donate today?

Ad Policy
x