Russ Feingold in 2008

[Ben.]

Feingold is with out a doubt the most eloquent Liberal Democrat in the Senate, his positions are principled and his style understated but firm… he would probably lose as a presidential nominee but he would be a far better spokesperson for his views than the likes of Dean or Hillary both of whom are divisive in their own way, Feingold would not be divisive. Don’t get me wrong I disagree with Feingold on a number of issues but I respect him a great deal and if I lived in WI I’d gladly vote for this principled liberal senator.

If he runs he’ll probably fight Dean for the Liberal vote in the primaries and I’d expect him to win that contest, however while he might do well in Iowa and New Hampshire he will find it next to impossible to win or even do well in the Southern Primaries.    

[Ben.]

If he runs he’ll probably fight Dean for the Liberal vote in the primaries and I’d expect him to win that contest, however while he might do well in Iowa and New Hampshire he will find it next to impossible to win or even do well in the Southern Primaries.   

He'd crush Dean, for one and only one reason: Democrats want to win the Presidency in the worst way, and Dean can't win.  LibDems aren't going to touch him with a 10ft pole.

While Feingold would lose big in SC and on Southern Tuesday, he'd do fantastic in Iowa, New Hampshire, Michigan, and Arizona (of course).  Which would carry momentum into the first Super Tuesday.

Feingold's biggest obstacle: money.  He's got to raise it fair and square, which means he'll need a nationwide, grassroots effort.  Once he gets enough delegates, though, the money will start to snowball.

Bayh would win Iowa if he ran; he could then survive a lower showing in NH and pull out some wins in the South, that said Iowa would probably be a Bayh vs. Feingold fight with Edwards (if he was stupid enough to run and not take my advice) would come in a distant third.     

[Ben.]

Feingold would be a great nominee for the Democrats.  Probably the most progressive candidate who has any chance to actually win.

But he won't get nominated, thankfully because much as i respect the guy he's too liberal on the issues of "God Guns and Gays"... I'm already backing Bayh for the nomination... let battle comence.     

[Ben.]

Feingold would be a great nominee for the Democrats.  Probably the most progressive candidate who has any chance to actually win.

But he won't get nominated, thankfully because much as i respect the guy he's too liberal on the issues of "God Guns and Gays"... I'm already backing Bayh for the nomination... let battle comence.     

Do you really think Bayh could win the nomination? If so, why?  (I think he's too conservative to get it.)

Democrats are desperate to win, they want it real bad, added to this thanks to the media blaming the defeat on the inability of Democrats to speak the “langue of values and morality” that strengthens the right of the party case that it is the electable wing, look at Clinton in 92, he was far more conservative than many of the candidates who ran in 2004… the race could well come down to a liberal and a moderate and I think that the moderate will win simply because given a choice between what some of the lefties believe is “ideologically pure” and the prospect of winning the presidency they’ll pick the latter as they did in 1992, 2000 and 2004 (so they thought)… not that it wouldn’t be hard for Bayh, but he would resist the urge to pander to the party and despite this I think he’d still win his stances on taxes and trade will play well with Democrats and after four year of republican dominance (I don’t know what to expect from 2006) most Democrats won’t care about the rest.

[Ben.]

Pro-choice groups do have powerful grass-roots organizations that could mobilize against Bayh.  In the general election he would lose their organization as well, but not to an opponent.

It would be something that would be thrown at him, but he could probably overcome it, the thing is his views on abortion are very much in line with the majority of Americans view that abortion should remain legal but with strict restrictions and the banning of procedures like partial birth abortion... the good thing about Bayh is he'd drive Dean crazy  

In 1992 where a lot of anti-death penalty groups very opposed to Clinton?

[Ben.]

The race will wind down to be between Hillary, Bayh, and Richardson. Whoever loses California between Hillary and Richardson will be out. If Richardson can sweep the entire Southwest (i.e. Texas and California) that's a lot of delegates that winning Mississippi and South Carolina won't help Bayh. Bayh will win almost every state that went Bush, except the Southwest, which Richardson will win. Washington and Wisconsin will be where Hillary needs to win, or else she will be out. If Richardson wins Florida, things could turn his way, but that's a late primary. Basically, will winning every Bush state except for the four Southwestern states + Florida (The Democratic vote there is minorities or New Yorkers, not Bayh territory) be enough for Bayh to win the nomination. Bayh could win Iowa, but Hillary will win New Hampshire, so I don't know how much of a snowball effect there will be. Richardson should get at least two, possibly three, states out of the Feb. 3 Primaries.

I don't think either Richardson or Clinton will even run.

Added to that thanks to the large contigent of independents in NH, Bayh would win it in a walk.

Your also assuming that the primary cycle is the same, when it proably won't be.

Added to all of this i don't think Warner will run, he'll go for the Senate in 2008, so i doubt he'll be Bayh's VP.

Bayh looks like he'll run, i think Feingold will and ontop of that possibly Edwards, Kerry, Dean and loads of others we can't think of right now, maybe Rendell as well.