A Thinking Reed

"Man is but a reed, the most feeble thing in nature, but he is a thinking reed" – Blaise Pascal

Feingold’s out

Looks like Russ Feingold has ruled out an 08 presidential run to focus on influencing the Democratic agenda in the Senate. This is too bad in my view, not because I expected him to actually get the nomination (much less win the general election), but that I think it would be useful to have an out-and-out dove in the primaries of at least one party. As things are shaping up now, we may end up with the debate carried on entirely between pro-interventionist Dems.

Currently it looks like John Edwards is the most leftward candidate likely to run, but I don’t recall him being particularly dovish on war and peace issues. I’m also not sure what the foreign policy views of the much-hyped Barack Obama are. But I would like to see a candidate who challenged the basic assumptions of our interventionist foreign policy.

4 responses to “Feingold’s out”

  1. Thomas Adams

    I was also disappointed to hear the news. As a native Wisconsinite, I have been a big fan of Feingold’s for many years, and I thought he would make an excellent presidential candidate – intelligent, progressive, and independent. And I think he had a better chance of getting the nomination than most thought. Wisconsin is by no means a liberal state, but he has grown quite popular among independents (and even some Republicans) because he is seen as principled and something of a maverick.

    We were recently in Madison and purchased a “Feingold for President” bumpersticker. Last night I asked my wife if we should take it off our car now that he’s out of the running. She replied, “Not until someone better comes along.” We might have to wait for long time.

    Reply
  2. Chris T.

    Is there any chance that Kucinich will run for the nomination again? Or someone from that neck of the political woods?

    Is Edwards really to Obama’s left? I guess it depends on the issues. Obama does worry me a bit in that it’s difficult to get a feel for him on a lot of issues. I suppose he is something of a pragmatist, which has its value. But I’m not necessarily sure where he stands in the ideological spectrum.

    With Iraq, Iran, and North Korea weighing on everyone’s minds so much, I fear the peace position is going to get ignored for quite some time, though.

    Reply
  3. Lee

    Well, I think Edwards has staked a position to the Left of most other potential candidates on issues like trade and poverty at least.

    As for Obama, I’m open to correction as to what his substantive views are, but he seems almost to have become a kind of cipher onto which people project whatever their hopes and aspirations for America are. As far as I can tell, this seems to be based primarily on his somewhat unique biography and the fact that he’s given a couple of good speeches. FWIW, he strikes me as far too green to be President, but what do I know.

    The thing about Feingold is that he was potentially a credible and serious candidate (unlike Kucinich sorry to say) who nevertheless had some farily radical votes on his record (only Senator to vote against the PATRIOT Act, e.g.). Almost all the other potential Dem candidates that I can think of basically accept the post-9/11 national security state arrangement. And, as Thomas points out, he has an independent streak and can’t quite be counted as a down-the-line liberal (I seem to remember him having fairly moderate views on gun rights, for one thing). By contrast, I have a hard time seeing anyone on the far left of the party like Kucinich getting much traction.

    Another possibility is that you could see a kind of culturally conservative/moderate anti-war populist (a la Jim Webb or Jack Murtha) make a run. A “peace candidate” like that would have a better shot at making inroads into Red America than an elite blue-stater like, say, Howard Dean.

    Reply
  4. Gaius

    RF is no out-and-out dove. He agrees the US must guarantee the existence and safety of Israel.

    Reply

Leave a comment