RK ARCHIVE - Feingold Running Away with Daily Kos "Straw Poll"

In other words, the liberal activist base of the Democratic Party appears to have decided who it wants as its nominee, and it is NOT AT ALL in sync with the party establishment. Interestingly, my preferred ticket of Warner/Clark isn't doing too badly if you combine their two vote totals. Given that Russ Feingold is NOT going to get the Democratic nomination - I'll bet the ranch on that one! - this poll is actually good news for Wes Clark and Mark Warner. As far as Hillary Clinton and John Kerry are concerned, it doesn't look good right now.

We'll see, but they've got a LONG way to go if they want to gain support from the Democratic activist base. And yes, that support is important, although not absolutely essential at the moment. By 2008, however, as the "netroots" continues to grow rapidly in strength and influence, such support might very well be essential. So who knows, maybe Russ Feingold WILL be the Democratic nominee in 2008. But I doubt it.

Comments

Warner's more pooular than you'd think (Craig - 5/23/2006 1:00:57 PM)

The image of the southern governor with a solid record of getting things done and cleaning up hige messes left by Republicans does have a certain appeal.

The main impediment to Warner right now is probably lack of exposure. Considering that, I think he's doing amazingly well. I guess there's something to be said for a fresh face, and Warner is certainly that.

It's only really good for Warner/Clark (va.walter - 5/23/2006 1:03:55 PM)

if you believe a big chunk of Feingold's voters would have voted for Warner or Clark if Feingold had not been an option. The truth is that most of Feingold's 46% would probably be split between Clinton, Gore and Kerry (interesting that Gore wasn't an option).

What that poll says is that about 1/4 of Daily Kos readers favor the Warner/Clark range of the political spectrum. That in and of itself could be viewed as a victory for Warner/Clark when you consider the perspective of the average Daily Kos reader.

Gore's the real story (Duke - 5/23/2006 1:10:26 PM)

You need to look at the second Daily Kos straw poll... the one where they include Al Gore. Gore's the guy who's really running away with the votes. 68% at last count.

Now, if he'll only run.

That's why I commented on his exclusion (va.walter - 5/23/2006 1:18:23 PM)

What the second poll shows is that a lot of Feingold's voters were really just Gore voters without Gore as an option. 2008 is setting up to be very interesting. The liberal to the bone Democrats will have the Gore option. The conservative Democrats will have Warner/Clark. The "we gotta win" Democrats will have Clinton. Throw in Kerry, Edwards, etc. and you have about 5-8 credible candidates, each with a legitimate shot if things break right.

I actually voted for Gore (phriendlyjaime - 5/23/2006 1:12:28 PM)

I just love him, and I would like to see him get the job he got in 2000. :)

I'm pretty sure Gore will not run. (summercat - 5/23/2006 3:18:00 PM)

Feingold will never get the nomination--and besides, he can do much more good in the Senate, great guy that he is. My man Clark usually leads in these polls--don't know if he will run, but he would have a lot of support if he did. And I think Warner will be moving up as he gets better known. These polls are tricky--they usually spin off the latest report in the media.
I sure hope Clinton is not hte nominee--aother case of someone who would be better off as a fine Senator--or maybe AG in a Dem administration.

A girl among men? (Kindler - 5/23/2006 7:26:27 PM)

Is there a reason why all the men are identified by their last names, but Hillary Clinton is identified by her first name?

Just curious... ;-)

To differentiate her from Bill (Lowell - 5/23/2006 7:39:16 PM)

at least that's why I do it. Anyway, everyone knows who "Hillary" is, not everyone knows who "John" is...

Hillary (Left Wing - 5/24/2006 7:45:15 AM)

I wish you were right, Lowell, but I don't think so. I've rarely heard Condaleeza Rice referred to as Rice. It's not even Condaleeza, it CONDI! Even in a sentence with others it's "...Cheney, Rumsfeld, Condi..." Why not "Dickie, Donny, Condi"? Unfortunately, I think we all know why.

At any rate, in a discussion of potential presidential candidates for 2008, I think everyone knows which Clinton is being referred to.

Anywayl, I see nothing derogatory here (Lowell - 5/24/2006 7:52:16 AM)

Giuliani is often referred to as "Rudy." Many celebrities are referred to by their first names ("Brad," "Ben," etc.). The problem with referring to "Clinton" is that there's a President Clinton already. That's why we often refer to this Bush as "shrub," "Dubya," etc. Maybe I'm missing something here, but I just don't see the problem.

PS Madeline Albright is never referred to as "Madeline." Teddy Roosevelt is often referred to as "Teddy." RFK is often referred to as "Bobby." Rush Limbaugh is usually called "Rush." I honstly think this has more to do with celebrity than anything else.