Scott Walker survived the recall election. I kept an eye on all the news sites as it the results rolled in after the 8PM poll close and Walker hit the ground running. He was leading with a wide margin when CNN projected him the winner with just 20% of the precincts reporting. Pretty soon all the other news sites followed suit but I kept an eye on the tally as Barrett slowly closed the gap but in the end it wasn’t enough. Chalk up a win for the job creators and a loss for the job havers and job wanters.
Now I could bitch and moan about how Barrett’s campaign was set up to fail and Walker played dirty pool his entire campaign but that would just be sour grapes. I could point out how Walker’s campaign spent literally over 7 times the money that Barrett’s spent with 66% of Walker’s money coming in from out of state *cough*kochbrothers*cough*-
but that would just be sore losing. I could talk about how CBS reported voter suppression efforts that solely favored Walker but that would just be my wounded liberal pride talking.
I could say that even though he won he could possibly face indictment on criminal corruption charges but that would just be me licking my wounds and ignoring the fact that the voters have spoken.
So I’m not going to say any of that stuff. I’m not bitter. I’ll just sit back and be content that I live in Minnesota.
Dumbass cheeseheads.
Why did they run the same guy who already lost to Walker in 2010?! Typical to the Democratic party, they’re bringing knives to gun fights.
Even taking out all the wound-licking listed above, it’s another case of the Republicans out-playing their opponents. The Democratic Party needs to get their shit together when it comes to politicking as a unit.
I cant wait to see what tyou post for your blog when the votes come to minnesota
With all due respect, I do not think the Republicans “outplayed” anyone. i believe the people of Wisconsin spoke loud and clear. Just as they did in 2010.
Something to consider is how many Wisconsonites voted against the “Walker’s Opposition.” In exit polls, four-out-of-five queried stated that they voted primarily due to the tactics of the anti-Walker campaign.
Also, something I find interesting is the continued mis/dis/ill-researched promulgation of information about Walker. Most of the foul stuff comes from sources that were simply doing everything possible to dig up dirt. As to the numbers quoted above, I find it interesting that while the Barrett campaign is not claiming the funds spent by the Anti-Walker crowd, they ARE tallying the funds that Walker had to raise to fight that enormously funded bash-campaign.
Walker was also accused of raising funds OUTSIDE Wisconsin – Barrett did this himself. But what Barrett failed to mention was that the Walker Opposition raised just as many millions to combat Walker – all from outside the state. But Barrett, while benefitting from that out-state, organized, anti-Walker campaign, could plausibly disavow those funds, as he had nothing to do with raising them.
Walker, on the other hand, took no money from outside Wisconsin donation UNTIL he had to mount a huge fight against an ENORMOUS juggernaut campaign funded by outside interests.
Why Barrett fails to accept the benefit of this connection is for purely political reasons. But, again, he has “plausible deniability” in benefitting from those funds, as it was all outside special interest groups that funded them. Walker had no choice but to fold or raise funds to fight the special interests.
At least it wasn’t Wisconsin State funds. It was all private donations.
As to “possibly being indicted,” there are many politicians who have faced “possible indictment” on both sides of the aisle. An indictment does not predicate conviction. If Walker is guilty of something, i am sure it will come out in the wash.
As for “voter supression,” voters turned out in unprecidented, unequalled numbers, yesterday. And Walker still won by a broader margin than he did two years ago.
Wisconsin has spoken. The people of this state have shown that they are tired of high deficits and union-controlled spending. Walker has shown that he sticks to principle despite name-calling, stone throwing and naysayers. he governs by what he promised: the power of his convictions and by what he believed to be right. And Wisconsin agreed with him over six-to-one.
Finally, the RECALL election failed, not because there was some behind-the-scenes chichanery, but because recall elections are not supposed to be about disgruntlement over policy. The majority of Wisconsin voters voted FOR Walker because, despite unpopularity a year ago, his policies actually WORKED. Lower taxes, more jobs and a balanced budget. Bingo.
Now, if the rest of the country follows suit in November, the presidency may get the overhaul it so desperately needs.
While your argument about Barrett’s funding is pretty convincing with it’s lack of any actual numbers or cited sources, you seem to have glossed over the whole “voter suppression” issue because, in your eyes, it didn’t work. Does that mean it’s okay?
I mean, it was people on Walker’s side sending out robocalls, letters and door knockers lying to people who would probably vote for Barrett.
Just so we’re clear, though. That’s okay as long as a lot of people still vote, right?
The first source for the funding is Walker’s own words during the televised gubernatorial debate between he and Barrett.
Voter Suppression – what facts do we have in hand to make the claim – since yesterday – that voter suppression took place?
Should the Democrats have won the recall, we’d be hearing from them what a referendum it was on Walker’s policies, and proof that he was not supported by Wisconsin. Instead, because they lost, we are hearing “voter suppression” and the like.
According to the Los Angeles Times report and CBS News, “Tom Barrett’s campaign has been swift to respond to the claims of misleading information being disseminated by an unidentified group. But, the Barrett campaign had yet to produce a single recording of one of the alleged robo-calls.”
Walker’s campaign released a statement denying that the campaign was connected to the calls. “Any accusation that our campaign is making those calls is categorically false and unfounded. Once again Mayor Barrett and his campaign are trying to falsely attack Governor Walker with absolutely no evidence. This is a desperate move by Mayor Barrett to avoid addressing his lack of a plan to create jobs in Wisconsin,” the statement said.
Walker does not have a record of dishonesty, so to claim it was his campaign that supported any sort of robo-calling done by an “anonymous” group is grasping at straws, at best, when attempting to link it to the Governor. Further, the Governmental Accountability Board.
Reid Magney, a spokesman for the Government Accountability Board, said he had received reports about the calls from both voters and the media but that the board had neither identified the source of the calls, nor the extent to which they are widespread. However, he noted that the board will work with District Attorneys on possible charges if and when it gets information about the source. So far, the GAP is not holding the Governor’s campaign suspect, as there is “no merit.”
So it is not me who has said it “doesn’t matter.” It is the GAP saying that they will investigate to see if there is even a source they can even charge with the ethics violation. I rather doubt it has anything to do with the Governor or his campaign.
In my opinion, any dumbass who listens to a robo-call informing them that they do not need to vote in a recall ELECTION, is pretty uninformed. And it seems to me that the informed got out in DROVES, yesterday, breaking all previous voter records. Robo-calls notwithstanding.
As far as money spent, according to the Center for Public Integrity, candidates and outside groups have spent a record-breaking $63.5 million on the recall election. Since Walker was forthcoming with his numbers of $34mm, that leaves quite a gap.
Wisconsin state law that permits the incumbent in a recall election to raise unlimited campaign contributions. The country’s three largest public unions, the National Education Association, the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, and the Service Employees International Union, have combined to contribute more than $2 million to super PACs and independent expenditure groups committed to fighting Walker and his policies against collective bargaining for public-sector employees.
High-dollar donations have come to Walker from anti-union billionaires including Dick DeVos, David Koch, and Sheldon Adelson, all in a response to National Unions garnering huge support from anti-Walker PACs independent contributors.
It’s funny that critics denounce Walker for spending money to defend his position against recall, but nothing has been said about the millions spent to attempt to unseat him.
Let’s talk about irresponsible usage of funds, now.
I never said that the robo-calling issue “didn’t matter” in light of the massive turn out. But I will maintain that it cannot – as of yet – be laid at the feet of the Walker campaign.
By the way… In a state that was carried by Obama in the last presidential election, also a state that has very monied contributors to the Obama campaign, unions and leftist ideals, the big question to ask regarding how Walker was able to raise seven times the amount of contributions comes down to a one-word question…. “WHY?”
Well, for one thing, the whole “Walker-spent-seven-times-more” argument is simply a Democratic “talking point,” that has no substance. Especially in light of the one word question above.
And for another thing, I think the people of Wisconsin have spoken loud and clear on “the funding of progressive liberal agendas.” Not only in Wisconsin, but in several other states, as well. People are over it, and it’s starting to be demonstrated at the polls.
Do YOU have an answer to the question, “WHY?”
Why does a state that votes for Obama also vote for Walker? That’s an easy one. They are both conservative. One is just more honest about it.
Damn, you write a lot. Alright. Here we go.
“Should the Democrats have won the recall, we’d be hearing from them what a referendum it was on Walker’s policies, and proof that he was not supported by Wisconsin. Instead, because they lost, we are hearing “voter suppression” and the like.”
-Well the accusations of voter suppression happened on election day (via CBS News) based on claims coming from people on and before election day so that whole “they’re bitching because they lost!” doesn’t add up timeline-wise.
Next point of business – “Walker’s campaign released a statement denying that the campaign was connected to the calls. “Any accusation that our campaign is making those calls is categorically false and unfounded. Once again Mayor Barrett and his campaign are trying to falsely attack Governor Walker with absolutely no evidence. This is a desperate move by Mayor Barrett to avoid addressing his lack of a plan to create jobs in Wisconsin,” the statement said.”
Note how Walker’s campaign didn’t deny that the calls were happening, just that the calls were not made by their official campaign. Basically, they’re adding plausible deniability that these calls were made by people who support them but are not them (kinda like that whole money that Barrett doesn’t have to claim thing you were talking about). Don’t you wanna know who was making these calls?
I DO want to know! But it is all too conspiratorial. Shadowy deeds from shadowy people. Or perhaps it’ s a lot simpler.
Oh, and as to being verbose, I’m a writer. What YOU can say in ten words, I can say in 4000. Hej.
Of course the Walker campaign didn’t deny the calls were happening. Know why? Because, along with everybody else, they were made aware that they did happen – an established fact with the Governmental Accountability Board and the District Attorney.
They issued a statement saying that whoever made those calls and was responsible for them had absolutely nothing to do with the Walker campaign. “Playing dirty” has never been Walker’s style, but it sure describes the anti-Walker Recallers tactics.
Just because you WANT there to be a connection to the Walker campaign, doesn’t mean there is. And brandishing it as if it were, is nothing short of promulgating a conspiracy theory; wishful Liberal thinking.
I have an even better theory…. the Barrett campaign in league with the anti-Walker Recallers staged the calls themselves, but made the calls to people who were “plants.” And they did this for the purpose of being able to have a plausible foundation for a recount or legal suit.
Sound far-fetched? If it does, simply look back at the tactics of the Recallers over the last year, then ask yourself, again, how implausible it sounds.
Late to the game on my rebuttal.
Democrats DID get outplayed. We legitimized the Right’s urge to call in to question the right of anyone’s seat in power that’s not them. The recall shouldn’t have happened in the first place. It’s improbable that a seated official is going to be removed from office after they’ve been voted in. The recall should only be used in the most extreme circumstances. While yes, Walker is a dick and is proving to be bad for Wisconsin (from my viewpoint), he’s not yet done enough to constitute a recall. The whole thing is a blow to the Democratic party in yet another crucial election year.
Politics is a game of inches. When the best possible outcome is you have a Democratic governor in a relatively small swing state unseat a first timer halfway through his term only to face another election in two years, but the worst possible outcome is you solidify the shitty first-term governor’s seat and put a black mark on the entire party’s record during a presidential election year… you should probably just ride it out. The republican’s saw that coming. I don’t think they were worried for a minute during the whole recall process.