Walker survives recall vote

Post Reply New Topic

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/06/us/po ... h_20120606

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/06 ... ted-heavy/

Such are the dangers of majoritarianism.

I'm not really a fan of recalls. The one in California was silly as well. All of that Republican energy and they hated Arnold anyway. I say unless the guy is building death camps, wait for the next election.

But what's happening in Wisconsin is interesting. The Republicans have perfected the art of the class war but they are waging it against the middle. It's a continuation and expansion of that old southern hatred for northern standards of living. The GOP, being the party of the south, has exported it everywhere. They want everyone in a low hourly wage, right-to-work, no retirement lifestyle. But no thought to the bankers and corporations. Teachers are to blame. lol.

I think it's because to people in a certain place, one level up is the "elite". These are people they see every day, and they resent them. They'll never see a Wall Street or K Street type.

All of a sudden you don't like democracy?

What are you complaining about. The labor union folk busted their arses to get Walker out. It looks like the farmers, the clerks, the mechanics, the local businessmen had a different idea. And I suppose the independent voters had it up to their nostrils with the unions.

Vox populi vox deus. The Voice of the People is the Voice of God.

ruveyn

Historically the GOP is a party of the North. It started out as an anti-slavery party and was the platform that launched Lincoln to the presidency. The GOP did not make headway in the South until after the passage of the Civil Rights laws under the Democrat, Lyndon Johnson. Nixon solidified the position of the GOP in the South.,

ruveyn

Look for the Koch brothers to provide armbands for all the goose stepping Republicans in Wisconsin.

Those "goose steppers" are mostly middle class protestants. They have had it with the government favored labor unions.

ruveyn

None of us particularly like bureaucrats whether they are unionized or not. It is our responsibility to make them more responsive and effective.

Big Belly Laugh! Once these parasites are imbedded they are harder to get rid of than tics.

ruiveyn.

That should be "vox populi vox dei" (genetive case).

Gov. Walker had a major financial advantage, and spent more than twice as much on his campaign, compared to his opponent. And, most of Governor Walker's money came from outside Wisconsin.

The Voice of the People is not the Voice of God, unless by the Voice of God you mean extremely wealthy people.

I made 2 post about this on the news forum, I'm lazy and will repost them here.

-----------


It's looking like it will be by a greater margin or at the very least very close to the same margin that Walker won by in 2010 vs Tom Barrett with a high turnout. The electorate has spoken, the turnout was amazing and this is how democracy works. A lot is being made about the money in the race but I don't buy that as a determining factor, the reason money didn't pour in for Tom Barrett was for numerous reasons. One, there was a democratic primary where the union's chosen candidate Kathleen Falk lost to the more moderate Tom Barrett. Falk actually raised more money than Barrett in the primary, I believe more than $5 million. The other reason the money was so low for Barrett was also simply because national democrats just didn't think he was going to win. In no poll in this campaign season has Barrett ever led Walker and Walker lead comfortably in almost every poll at 50% and above. If the race was actually more competitive, I believe the money spent would of been a lot closer.

One of the weird things about this election night was how far off exit polling was from the real results. They were projecting it to be a close race and it was a blowout.

I don't think it is good for Obama obviously but I don't think it spells doom for him either. Obama did win Wisconsin by 14% but the state has been trending purple for a long time now. 2008 was kind of an anomaly, in 2000 and 2004 the presidential race in Wisconsin was one of the closest in the whole country. I think 2012 will be very similar to 2000 and 2004. Obama had a significant lead over Romney in tonight's exit polling but you can't really take those numbers seriously by how off the exit poll was on the gubernatorial race.

It will be interesting to see the long term impact of this election in the state since the union power structure has been severely weakened. It appears that the all the GOP state senators up for recall this election have retain their seats and thus will still control the Wisconsin State Senate. The next ambitious legislative move that Walker will pursue is expected to try making Wisconsin a 'right to work state' which will further weaken unions in the state.

--------------------

that last paragraph may be off for right now since the democrat took a narrow lead in final state senate race but there will likely be a recount. New districting hasn't taken effect yet either and I heard that senate district will become more conservative so it could flip again in the next election there. In November 16 out of 33 senate seats(10 democrats 6 republicans) will be up for grabs so these 5 months in between will likely just be an extended lame duck session. (I can't imagine much getting done)

I really don't think the money in this campaign decided this race, what people don't understand is that we in Wisconsin have been dealing with this for 18 months and people had made their mind up well before the campaign season began. Leading up to last night there was a remarkable lack of movement in the polls. Tom Barrett was the Democratic challenger to Scott Walker in 2010 and had ran for governor previously in 2002, narrowly losing the primary to Jim Doyle. The people knew both candidates exceptionally well and rejected Tom Barrett for governor for a 3rd time.

So what. Money does not vote. People do.

Do you allege that those who voted in favor of Walker received cash bribes? If so, produce the evidence.

ruveyn

If people did not think that money would buy them what they wanted, they would not contribute to the campaign.

Don't be naive. Bribes are not the point. Money may not vote, but the disparity between the amounts raised on the two sides ensured that the field was tilted in favor of the Republicans. The Democratic challenger Tom Barrett was able to raise $3.9 million, about only a fifth of which came from outside Wisconsin. In contrast, Scott Walker was able to raise $30.5 million; two-thirds of that was from out-of-state contributions. Walker had a financial advantage of 8-to-1, which he used to bombard the airwaves of Wisconsin with anti-Democratic ads for months, even before Barrett was named the nominee. Don't say cash doesn't matter in campaigning, because that's demonstrably false, especially when the distribution of the money is so one-sided.

Since the Citizens United case and the Republican midterms in 2010, the Republican party has been trying desperately to kill off the unions because the unions are the only major fundraisers for the Democratic Party. All the other big money contributions go toward the Republicans, mostly because the super-rich know the Republicans will give them everything they want. That is why Wisconsin matters so much to the National Republican Party; Walker is the most high-profile GOP governor on a long list of GOP governors elected in 2010 (Rick Scott in Florida, Rick Snyder in Michigan, John Kasich in Ohio, etc.) who have been pushing anti-union and voter suppression legislation to make it harder for Democratic voters to make their voices heard. What the GOP is doing now is an attempt to completely dismantle democracy as we know it, give all the power to the wealthy, and effectively reduce the U.S. to a permanent one-party state. Now that Walker has retained his position, the Republican Party is going to interpret this as a mandate to go full speed ahead dismantling unions and rolling back workers' rights.

This has nothing to do with vox populi. This is the vox dives.

Walker raised more money in Wisconsin than Barrett as well. Kathleen Falk raised more than $5 million in the democratic primary and there were two other candidates in the primary as well. (Doug La Follette and Kathleen Vinehout) The DNC decided not to go all in on this race since they felt Walker would win, that's probably the biggest reason the money disparity was so much. The union issue was obviously a losing issue for the democrats as their chosen candidate couldn't even win the primary. Tom Barrett, a two time gubernatorial loser, is a moderate who used the new budget control bill to balance his own city's budget and that's what sparked this whole debacle. It was a losing battle and it has been for a long time. The national party knew it and the media just didn't want to accept it.

Is it starting to look as if we had better brace ourselves for the inevitability of *gasp* President Romney!?!?!?!?!?!?!?