Feingold For President?

[angelatc]

The subject came up briefly on McLaughlin Group today - will Russ Feingold take his strong anti-war position and oppose Obama for the Democratic nomination?

[anaconda]

So will Obama face a challenge from within his party, in your opinion?

[BenIsForRon]

That would be fucken awesome. It would be a good back up plan if republicans don't break out of their Sarah Palin trance.

[FrankRep]

The Freedom Index (http://www.thenewamerican.com/files/Freedom_Index_111-4.pdf) (Constitution Report Card) rated Russ Feingold as 33% Constitutional.

Hell NO.

[RonPaulFanInGA]

The subject came up briefly on McLaughlin Group today - will Russ Feingold take his strong anti-war position and oppose Obama for the Democratic nomination?

Answer: no.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1110/Feingold_wont_challenge_Obama_in_12.html

FeinGONE.

[amy31416]

He'd smear Obama in a primary...love to see it.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

John Boner got 90% on your 'Freedom Index' and Spencer Bachus got 80%. If that doesn't say what a farcical joke that Index is, then I don't know what to tell you.

[FrankRep]

John Boner got 90% on your 'Freedom Index' and Spencer Bachus got 80%. If that doesn't say what a farcical joke that Index is, then I don't know what to tell you.
The Democrats are in Power.
Republicans naturally score higher because they are blocking the Democrats.

This doesn't change the fact that Russ Feingold scored a 33% (http://www.thenewamerican.com/files/Freedom_Index_111-4.pdf) on the Constitution.

[BenIsForRon]

The Democrats are in Power.
Republicans naturally score higher because they are blocking the Democrats.

This doesn't change the fact that Russ Feingold scored a 33% (http://www.thenewamerican.com/files/Freedom_Index_111-4.pdf) on the Constitution.

Your brain's only function is as a news aggregator. You should upload a critical thinking program.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

The Democrats are in Power.
Republicans naturally score higher because they are blocking the Democrats.

This doesn't change the fact that Russ Feingold scored a 33% (http://www.thenewamerican.com/files/Freedom_Index_111-4.pdf) on the Constitution.

The methodology is telling. A person should be vetted on his 'Constitutional' votes, or by liberty, through ALL of his votes since his first day in office, not just in the last year or two. That shows what a piss poor methodology is used. You could have been 0% from 1990-2003, but if you suddenly turn around, then you would be 90% or more. Then people like you look at it and go -- oh hey, he isn't bad he got 90%! What a farce, like I said.

Boner and Bachus are arguably as bad or worse than Feingold.

[unconsious767]

First Jewish president?

[South Park Fan]

That would end any chance Ron Paul would have at winning crossover votes from Democrats.

[Brian4Liberty]

It might be fun, but there is little doubt that Obama will win the Democrat Primary.

[FrankRep]

Boner and Bachus are arguably as bad or worse than Feingold.

The Freedom Index (http://www.thenewamerican.com/files/Freedom_Index_110-4.pdf) - 110th United States Congress - Duration: January 3, 2007 – January 3, 2009

John Boehner: 64% Constitutional
Spencer Bachus: 56% Constitutional


The Freedom Index nailed them both on unConstitutional votes.

[low preference guy]

Your brain's only function is as a news aggregator. You should upload a critical thinking program.

Ben, you're on a roll today. RPF is telling me I can't give you rep because I did so too recently.

[MRoCkEd]

I would love to see Feingold primary Obama. But if he won't... Ralph Nader? Or for extreme comedy... Alan Grayson? :p

[FrankRep]

Boner and Bachus are arguably as bad or worse than Feingold.

Are you unwilling to admit that Russ Feingold has a poor Constitutional voting record?

When George Bush was in power, Russ Feingold scored a 20% (http://www.thenewamerican.com/files/Freedom_Index_110-4.pdf) on the Constitution. That's just sad.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Are you unwilling to admit that Russ Feingold has a poor Constitutional voting record?

When George Bush was in power, Russ Feingold scored a 20% (http://www.thenewamerican.com/files/Freedom_Index_110-4.pdf) on the Constitution. That's just sad.

Yes, Feingold was bad. I never said he wasn't, but he is better than a lot of the people who got a higher rating on that Index. Feingold was better on Foreign Policy, Civil Liberties, and he voted against TARP. Yes, he is atrocious in other areas, but apparently you forget that he voted against TARP and the Patriot Act! Unlike you, I do my own research when it comes to a persons votes and record, and don't let the JBS Politburo do my thinking for me.

[angelatc]

He'd smear Obama in a primary...love to see it.

When I posted this I wasn't suggesting we endorse him. :) I was just repeating a rumor I heard.

I would have to do some serious soul searching to not vote for him in the general against any of the perceived current front-runners, that's for sure. I've always said that the wars were the closest thing I had to a single issue, and he's consistently anti-war.

I'm not sure I wouldn't vote for him.

[low preference guy]

Feingold was bad and shouldn't have been reelected to the Senate. But he is much better than Obama. I would probably still prefer a Republican who is against Obamacare, considering that Feingold is for it. But if the choice is between Feingold and Obama, there isn't even a contest.

[BenIsForRon]

Are you unwilling to admit that Russ Feingold has a poor Constitutional voting record?

When George Bush was in power, Russ Feingold scored a 20% (http://www.thenewamerican.com/files/Freedom_Index_110-4.pdf) on the Constitution. That's just sad.

Frank is no longer accepting outside information. He's read the webpage and no longer needs to use logic or reasoning.

[Agorism]

No thanks.

Glad Feingold is done.

[angelatc]

Answer: no.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1110/Feingold_wont_challenge_Obama_in_12.html

FeinGONE.

The McLaughlin pundits laughed and pointed out that Obama had no interest in running, either.

[low preference guy]

I'm not sure I wouldn't vote for him.

If he is running against Romney, it wouldn't be hard to prefer Feingold.

[FrankRep]

Yes, Feingold was bad. I never said he wasn't, but he is better than a lot of the people who got a higher rating on that Index. Feingold was better on Foreign Policy, Civil Liberties, and he voted against TARP. Yes, he is atrocious in other areas, but apparently you forget that he voted against TARP and the Patriot Act! Unlike you, I do my own research when it comes to a persons votes and record, and don't let the JBS Politburo do my thinking for me.

Look again: Boehner: 64% | Bachus: 56%

The Freedom Index (http://www.thenewamerican.com/files/Freedom_Index_110-4.pdf) - 110th United States Congress - Duration: January 3, 2007 – January 3, 2009

[amy31416]

When I posted this I wasn't suggesting we endorse him. :) I was just repeating a rumor I heard.

I would have to do some serious soul searching to not vote for him in the general against any of the perceived current front-runners, that's for sure. I've always said that the wars were the closest thing I had to a single issue, and he's consistently anti-war.

I'm not sure I wouldn't vote for him.

I certainly wouldn't suggest that we endorse him either...and if RP's running for prez, there's no way I could use my vote on anyone but him. But if it's all warmongers running on the GOP side---well then we're talking.

At minimum, I'd encourage the Dems to support Feingold over Obama.

I'm not entirely a one-issue voter either, but the wars and potential war with Iran is getting me closer.

[angelatc]

If he is running against Romney, it wouldn't be hard to prefer Feingold.

Or Huckabee.

Maybe Feingold / Bloomberg will start that a third party run. Certainly not a platform that I had envisioned previously, but possibly viable at this point in time if the GOP performs as expected and sells us out again.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Look again: Boehner: 64% | Bachus: 56%

The Freedom Index (http://www.thenewamerican.com/files/Freedom_Index_110-4.pdf) - 110th United States Congress - Duration: January 3, 2007 – January 3, 2009

Do you ever utter a sentence that isn't a regurgitation of something JBS? I have hardly ever seen you utter an original sentence, ever. I am not even sure if you aren't an AI designed to submit every single JBS article on RPF, through the servers in Appleton.

[angelatc]

I'm not entirely a one-issue voter either, but the wars and potential war with Iran is getting me closer.

Don't forget Yemen! The shadow of the Whack-A-Mole mallet seems to be hovering over them these days.

[amy31416]

Don't forget Yemen! The shadow of the Whack-A-Mole mallet seems to be hovering over them these days.

Nope. I've known that we're creeping into Yemen for a while. Looks like it's a strategic port. I'm surprised we haven't heard more about Oman yet....

[klamath]

Do you ever utter a sentence that isn't a regurgitation of something JBS? I have hardly ever seen you utter an original sentence, ever. I am not even sure if you aren't an AI designed to submit every single JBS article on RPF, through the servers in Appleton.
Coming from the person that can only utter- It is all in the books man, read the books man, when questioned about his own hairbrained philosophy that he can neither detail nor practice in his own life.

[FrankRep]

Do you ever utter a sentence that isn't a regurgitation of something JBS? I have hardly ever seen you utter an original sentence, ever. I am not even sure if you aren't an AI designed to submit every single JBS article on RPF, through the servers in Appleton.

Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, and I love the JBS and The New American. I find it sad that you attack me personally when I post a Constitutional scorecard on the politicians in office.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, and I love the JBS and The New American. I find it sad that you attack me personally when I post a Constitutional scorecard on the politicians in office.

First off, the methodology used is suspect, and when you dismiss somebody for the horrible methodology employed it makes your judgment suspect. You think more highly of two people who voted for TARP, Patriot Act, and Foreign interventionism over someone who voted against TARP, Patriot Act, and against Foreign interventionism. You have bad judgment.

[Son of Detroit]

I wouldn't even think about supporting Feingold. He's scum.

[pcosmar]

Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, and I love the JBS and The New American. I find it sad that you attack me personally when I post a Constitutional scorecard on the politicians in office.

I voted for Chuck and supported Ron.
But the "scorecard" is bullshit.

If it were close to true the War on Drugs would long have ended, the troops would be home and I would own a gun.
The R's are no better and often worse than the D's.

I wouldn't endorse Feingold, but would welcome him to the race just for the alternate views and to chum the waters.

[BlackTerrel]

Obama will win the democratic nomination. And honestly he has a 90% chance of winning the general unless the GOP puts in someone who can bring out the independent vote - like Ron Paul. If it is someone like Huckabee or Palin Obama will win all the middle voters and win handily.

[Imaginos]

LOLOL.
Thanks for the laugh.

[Knightskye]

“President Obama signed into law health insurance reform that gives people more control over their own health care.
http://www.russfeingold.org/issues/health-care.html

Poor guy's gone mental.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

http://www.russfeingold.org/issues/health-care.html

Poor guy's gone mental.

Indeed. Feingold is horrible on economics, just like Kucinich.

[FrankRep]

First off, the methodology used is suspect, and when you dismiss somebody for the horrible methodology employed it makes your judgment suspect. You think more highly of two people who voted for TARP, Patriot Act, and Foreign interventionism over someone who voted against TARP, Patriot Act, and against Foreign interventionism. You have bad judgment.

You won't find me supporting Boehner (64% (http://www.thenewamerican.com/files/Freedom_Index_110-4.pdf)), Bachus (56% (http://www.thenewamerican.com/files/Freedom_Index_110-4.pdf)), or even Feingold (20% (http://www.thenewamerican.com/files/Freedom_Index_110-4.pdf)). Your statement about me is false.

[FrankRep]

I voted for Chuck and supported Ron.
But the "scorecard" is bullshit.
When the Republicans were in power, the Republican scores dropped and The Freedom Index reflected that. That's not bullshit.


The R's are no better and often worse than the D's.
We both agree. What's the problem?


I wouldn't endorse Feingold, but would welcome him to the race just for the alternate views and to chum the waters.
I would personally like to see Constitutional candidates running, but that's just a personal preference of mine.

[Ekrub]

Coming from the person that can only utter- It is all in the books man, read the books man, when questioned about his own hairbrained philosophy that he can neither detail nor practice in his own life.

This made me laugh.

And I don't see any problem with Frank posting relevant articles in topics.

[pcosmar]

I would personally like to see Constitutional candidates running, but that's just a personal preference of mine.
So would I, unfortunately they usually don't get votes.
Very rarely in fact.
Less than 7000 voted for the Constitution in my district. Not enough.
:(

[libertythor]

As long as I had a third party candidate to vote for that was on at least 40 state ballots, I wouldn't vote for Boner or Feingold under any circumstance.

Personally I am more focused on congress and state legislatures than the Presidency in 2012.

[FrankRep]

Less than 7000 voted for the Constitution in my district. Not enough. :(
Election Results (http://election.townhall.com/election-2010/state/MI/)

The Republicans did fairly well in Michigan. What happened?
I guess the "Constitution" candidate didn't follow the advice of Ron Paul and run as a Republican.

[angelatc]

Election Results (http://election.townhall.com/election-2010/state/MI/)

The Republicans did fairly well in Michigan. What happened?
I guess the "Constitution" candidate didn't follow the advice of Ron Paul and run as a Republican.

Which shows how little you actually know about that district. Linda Goldthorpe, the GOP constitutional conservative, lost the primary to Dan "Instant Tea" Benichek. Only then did the third party candidate enter the picture. That person lost too.

[Kregisen]

If a Democrat opposes Obama for president, then that hurts Ron.

I'm not sure how many do, but I've heard that many Democrats could be switching parties to Republican during the 2012 primaries to vote for Ron Paul, since there shouldn't be democratic presidential primaries.

It's interesting to think about.

[FrankRep]

Which shows how little you actually know about that district. Linda Goldthorpe, the GOP constitutional conservative, lost the primary to Dan "Instant Tea" Benichek. Only then did the third party candidate enter the picture. That person lost too.
What's the dirt on Dan Benishek?

Looking good so far:

Benishek (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Benishek) considers himself fiscally and socially conservative, pro-life and pro-gun rights. In healthcare reform, he supports the Republican position of tort reform and allowing insurance companies to compete across state lines without federal regulation. He staunchly opposes federal funding for elective abortions. He supports lower taxes and secure borders.

[nate895]

Your brain's only function is as a news aggregator. You should upload a critical thinking program.

Your brain's only function is to defend liberals despite their statism. You should install some anti-virus software up there.

It's called sarcasm

[djdellisanti4]

When the Republicans were in power, the Republican scores dropped and The Freedom Index reflected that. That's not bullshit.




Both parties probably have worse scores when they're in power as opposed to when they are not. The nature of the beast.

[BamaAla]

What's the dirt on Dan Benishek?

Looking good so far:

Benishek (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Benishek) considers himself fiscally and socially conservative, pro-life and pro-gun rights. In healthcare reform, he supports the Republican position of tort reform and allowing insurance companies to compete across state lines without federal regulation. He staunchly opposes federal funding for elective abortions. He supports lower taxes and secure borders.

A quick bing search of the two leads me to believe Linda Goldthorpe was the better choice.

Dan Benishek:
"Furthermore, we must aggressively pursue the war on terror and must try prisoners of war in military tribunals — not as citizens in our civilian courts."

"These reforms should include providing younger workers with the option of investing a portion of their current Social Security taxes into personal retirement accounts, similar to the retirement plan already available to federal employees. The program should also include a property right so workers can pass on these assets to their heirs."

http://www.benishekforcongress.com/issues/


Linda Goldthorpe:

"If we are serious about balancing the budget, we must also recognize that our military presence around the globe is un-affordable and unnecessary."

"There are two critical steps we must take to reclaim our prosperity. The first step is simple: we must reduce our budget. The military spending and the health care/welfare spending comprise the glut of it, and in both areas, the government spends far more than it should."

"The second step is less obvious: we must return to sound monetary policy. Presently, we allow the Federal
Reserve to create money from thin air, we allow banks to loan money far above the assets they have on hand,
and we allow our government to borrow money with almost no limit."

http://www.lindaforcongress.com/issues/taxes

Granted, this was the first time I've ever heard of either of them, but it appears that the better friend of liberty lost.

[pcosmar]

What's the dirt on Dan Benishek?



Benishek is/was a bought and paid for puppet. He has no thoughts of his own and says what he is told to say.

There were several better choices. Linda at the top of the list. The GOP despises Liberty and liberty candidates and pushed, promoted and financed Benishek from the start.

This is the Saul Anuzis (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1835140/posts) GOP.
:mad:

[pcosmar]

http://www.lindaforcongress.com/issues/taxes

Granted, this was the first time I've ever heard of either of them, but it appears that the better friend of liberty lost.

I had posted here for Linda, and she has posted here. She also endorsed Glenn Wilson after it was clear that the GOP was opposed to her and her message.
I had also posted Glenn's info.

YouTube - Glenn Wilson vs The Dons! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWSlUEfg37E)

[klamath]

Both parties probably have worse scores when they're in power as opposed to when they are not. The nature of the beast. That is why I always go back and check voting records before Obama. Those that have high voting score before then I have more faith in.
However like McCain who went from a score of 45 to the 80's you know they are in it for power and nothing else.

[oyarde]

I voted for Chuck and supported Ron.
But the "scorecard" is bullshit.

If it were close to true the War on Drugs would long have ended, the troops would be home and I would own a gun.
The R's are no better and often worse than the D's.

I wouldn't endorse Feingold, but would welcome him to the race just for the alternate views and to chum the waters.

Good point , at the very least , you would be armed .