Election 2008: Between Russ Feingold and Jeb Bush, who would win?

[Notre Dame rules!]

C'mon guys!  You still have a liberal at the top of the ticket.  It didn't fly in '04, it won't fly in '08. 

Santorum has a better chance of bringing PA to the GOP than Warner has pulling VA far enough to the left to elect Feingold. 

Give me a REALISTIC map!

[Notre Dame rules!]

Frodo,

That's simply not true.  I can easily see Gov Bredesen winning the White House, or at the very least, having a very good shot at it.   However, if believing that a flaming liberal stands little to no chance of winning the WH makes me a political hack, well, I guess I'm guilty as charged.


Regarding Bush fatigue, I'm not totally convinced that is a fait accompli.  If, and I do mean if, democratization begins to take hold around the Middle East, and the economy continues to be robust, why would there necessarily be Bush fatigue.  Dubya and Jeb are two very different sorts of people. While they are both conservative, George is far more of an internationalist--as we have seen during his Presidency.  Jeb, on the other hand, is somewhat like Clinton, in that he is much more of a policy wonk.  

With the Intl agenda already set by Dubya, Jeb could concentrate on the mechanics of solving Social Security (since it probably won't get solved this year--due to Democrat obstructionism), health care, and other domestic concerns.

[Notre Dame rules!]

Smash,

It's true that the GOP never passed up an opportunity to remind eveyone of how liberal Kerry was.  However, Kerry's 'war hero' status helped to moderate him in the eyes of many, especially at CBS, NBC, and ABC. 

I can't  begin to count how many times a GOP stategist would start  exposing Kerry's record, only to be cut off with how Kerry was a 'war hero.'     

Unless Feingold can find some pictures of himself in uniform, I don't think that he will be able to dodge the red smear.

[Notre Dame rules!]

I disagree.  The MSM savaged the Swift Boat Veterans at every turn. 

How many times do you recall Dan Rather, Peter Jennings, or Tom Brokaw calling for Kerry to sign a release of his military records.   On several occasions, I heard reporters asking Scott McClellan when Bush would release his records--something that Bush had already done when he signed the SF-180. 

The MSM routinely accepted Kerry's ever changing account of his Vietnam service, while challenging Bush at every turn.

Fox News may be powerful by cable news standards, but far more people geet their news from the big 3 than they do from Fox.  The only thing that viewers from the major networks were told about the Swift Boat Vets was that they were a cabal of GOP activists hired by the White House to smear Kerry.  While ONE of their contributors was a GOP activist, many thousands of others donated to their effort.  Ironically, the MSM virtually never mentioned the millions of dollars that George Soros personally donated to unseat Bush, nor did they mention his connections to the Kerry campaign.

[Notre Dame rules!]

The people can see right thru a candidate who moderates his views 18 months to two years before running for President.  It's a clear sign that he/she is running FROM their record.   

If Feingold does run, and I've already said that I don't think he can win, he should go ahead and run as a liberal.  Admittedly, we will try to paint him as a liberal at every opportunity.  He can only make it worse by running against himself.   Look what that did to Kerry:  'I vactually voted for the $87 billion, before I voted against it.'  He's better off embracing his record than trying to hide from it.

Wiser still, you guys should nominate someone like Bayh, Bredesen, or even Sen Nelson from NE.  While many of you on the left that are committed activist see them as no different than Republicans, their views are FAR more mainstream than those of most Party activists.  They, unlike Feingold, stand a chance at getting elected.  Furthermore, they, unlike Feingold, have a better chance of getting some of their agenda passed by a Republican controlled Senate and House.

[Notre Dame rules!]

The people can see right thru a candidate who moderates his views 18 months to two years before running for President.  It's a clear sign that he/she is running FROM their record.   

If Feingold does run, and I've already said that I don't think he can win, he should go ahead and run as a liberal.  Admittedly, we will try to paint him as a liberal at every opportunity.  He can only make it worse by running against himself.   Look what that did to Kerry:  'I vactually voted for the $87 billion, before I voted against it.'  He's better off embracing his record than trying to hide from it.

Wiser still, you guys should nominate someone like Bayh, Bredesen, or even Sen Nelson from NE.  While many of you on the left that are committed activist see them as no different than Republicans, their views are FAR more mainstream than those of most Party activists.  They, unlike Feingold, stand a chance at getting elected.  Furthermore, they, unlike Feingold, have a better chance of getting some of their agenda passed by a Republican controlled Senate and House.

The problem is that Kerry didn't have the charisma, he wasn't able to respond well to the attacks & fell victim to the northeastern liberal stigma.  Feingold has the charisma,and he is from small town Wisconsin, not exactly the same breed as Kerry.

You mention that the Dems should nominate someone from the more moderate wing of their party with more mainstream views.  Well look at the names that hjas mainly been thrown around by the GOP its not Collis, Specter, Snowe its Santroum, Frist, etc, people with views FAR from the mainstream also.

A conservative that is a good candidate with charisma and can connect well to people can do well outside of their conservative base.  The same holds true for a liberal.  While you can make the same liberal argument for Feingold, he connects MUCH better with people than Kerry did & has a lot more charisma very CLintonesque in that sense.

It's true that most of the GOP candidates that get mentioned are conservatives rather than moderates.  However, as many on this site have pointed out, this country is basically moderate-conservative.  A conservative can rally the base and pull from the center. 
 
A left-leaning candidate has a harder time pulling moderates to the left that a right leaning candidate has of pulling them to the right (their natural inclination).   I'm not saying that it can't be don, but it is a much tougher task. 

Demographics also favor the right.  White men overwhelmingly vote GOP.  Married white women strongly favor the Republicans as well.  The most socially conservative group of all, as well as being the most religious, senior citizens, also lean GOP.   These 3 groups also tend to vote in higher proportions than younger voters, minorities, and single women.