Money is NOT the only reason Walker won.

[RBInMaine]

Yup, money enabled Walker to saturate the airwaves and drive up his turnout and that really sucks, and the Dems just couldn't come close to matching it. BUT,

It was also about MANY voters there just not wanting to set a precedent of recalling a governor short of proven illegal activity. They felt it was an unfair do-over and that the INCUMBENT should get to finish his term even if he is something of an asshat. So the R's won the Indies and even some Dems because of that. They also want the recalls to end. They are getting voter fatigue.


On the positive side, looks like the Dems now have the State Senate back, and they were able to increase their numbers over 2010. It is just that the Pukes, with the help of Indies and even a few Dems, were able to do that much more.

Dems now need to get more focused for the fall, need to hone their message, and need to get some big donors of their own.

[loyalsister]

1. I think that's probably true

Recalls are disruptive and expensive. Having just been through one it seems that it would be expected that there would be some election fatigue. I think they naturally blamed the Dems because they were the petitioners.

[fasttense]

44. I think it is probably NOT true.

Because I heard all those talking points from RepubliCONS long before the Dems even had a candidate.

They are nothing but talking points used to hide what really happened in Wisconsin.

[eowyn_of_rohan]

68. thank you, fasttense - nt

[HiPointDem]

76. +1. it's a ridiculous thesis. like any significant % of dems are going to vote for a scott walker

just to show they don't like recall elections.

just ridiculous, yet so many "democrats" are pushing it at DU.

[Xedniw]

83. Walker's people framed the recall as illegitimate before it even got underway

Very successful propaganda. Honest folks are nothing against it.

[nanabugg]

47. Dems have not understood for 40 years that state and LOCAL elections are most important to

control of the national agenda. The GOP knows this and with the help of the media they will win every time if we Dems can't change this picture. Minorities and women really need to be pitched to in all local elections across this country or we are not only in for "hard economic" time, but "dangerous and unsafe" living environment. And no manner or number of gates will be able to protect 1% eventually.

[loyalsister]

48. In my area they work the pipeline

An overlooked way to gather evidence\knowledge and make connections is to serve on local boards and commissions. It also provides leadership opportunities.
Cities and counties usually have human rights commissions, advisory committees on women's issues, economic development, etc.

If you have some expertise, get on one and take everything to grassroots organizations to facilitate advocacy. I have seen it in action working to influence elected officials from the bottom up.

[abelenkpe]

2. Voters kept walker out of a sense of fairness?

Im sorry that just seems like baloney.

Davis was recalled for far less so I really can't buy that.

[Paka]

3. But CA thinking is so very different than WI.

And if it hadn't been such a bizarre recall with about 150 names on the ballot, Arnie might not have won.

[HiPointDem]

77. no it's not. the whole line is just propaganda.

[Xedniw]

84. Remember, the GOP Establishment supported the recall of Gray Davis (Daryl Issa, (R))

As did talk radio (Clear Channel)

That's why it worked.

The DNC kept their hands off of Wisconsin and provided no money or help. It was a local effort against a national effort (of monied people).

[SemperEadem]

7. so true

Walker was kept because there were more Wisconsinite voters who succumbed to koch-sucking brainwashing than those who weren't. Period. Either that or the voting machines were rigged. They are the one who think they won't be touched. The saving grace is that the house is now majority Democratic and he can't finish implementin his "kill off the middle class proletariat" game plan.

But it still doesnt erase the fact that Walker is under FBI investigation and this vote may come around to haunt those who voted for him to retain his job:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/06/03/1097031/-David-Shuster-Scott-Walker-is-in-fact-a-target-in-a-federal-investigation

[RBInMaine]

10. Crazy as it seems, YUP, and that is what the exit polling PROVES.

Look at the exit polling. People who voted for Walker but said they'd support Obama in the fall, many of them Indies, just did not like the idea of the recall on principle.

Plenty of people who voted for Walker have no great love of him, but they also just didn't think they should overturn the first election. It is actually understandable (much as I think they should have canned him). Voters are hesitant to overturn elections before the person's term is up even if they are something of an asshat. Our governor in Maine is a real asshat much like Walker, but I think even as much as people don't like him, many up here would struggle with the idea of a recall. People do believe in allowing a person to complete the original term.

[Mayflower1]

22. Wouldn't you think that if the exit polls were SO wrong about the gov. race,

they might also be wrong about the presidential race?

Just sayin' - can't trust the polls that were wrong. It will take a few weeks for this huge loss to settle in to see what the impact will be.

[Fawke Em]

34. Um... the exit polls weren't wrong about the governor's race.

???

[HiPointDem]

79. um -- what?

Exit poll numbers released to subscribers just before polls closed in the Wisconsin recall election Tuesday dangled the possibility that Milwaukee Mayor Tommy Barrett (D) could win.

The numbers seemed to pop off the screen — 50 percent apiece for Barrett and Republican Gov. Scott Walker, the subject of the recall effort. Walker had a clear lead in independent pre-election polls, so the tie score sent analysts scrambling and buoyed Democratic hopes when the numbers were widely reported elsewhere minutes later at the official poll close time.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/what-happened-with-the-wisconsin-exit-poll/2012/06/06/gJQA3GYfIV_blog.html

[HiPointDem]

78. you mean the exit polling that predicted a dead heat? jesus, eat it up, eat it up.

[cyclezealot]

13. Davis took the rap for Enron's electric rate thievery

Not fair. the crisis was not entirely of his making. But, that is how it goes. Voters have not the patience to understand how something came about. Just they expect immediate results in a system that disallows that. And to boot.. Arnie came in , who was one who lobbied for electric privatization.. Life is just not fair.
On top of that all. Grey had a bland personality as a competent technocrat, who had a problem going on the attack against his enemies.

[fasttense]

39. I agree with you abelenkpe

"Voter fatigue" and not approving of recalls were right wing talking points long before the race got close. These talking points were used over and over again in ads paid for by the Koch brothers. This poster repeating the talking points points here on DU show how effective they were. It's nothing but spin to hide something else.

So, what are they hiding?

It is one of 2 things. Either the election was rigged which Wisconsin has a history of (David Prosser), or the flood of media airwaves by right wing propaganda brainwashed the voters. If the voters succumbed to Koch brother propaganda, then they deserve what they get.

[slackmaster]

69. CA law does not require a reason in order to recall an elected official

Just a petition with enough signatures.

[HiPointDem]

80. Neither does wisconsin.

http://legis.wisconsin.gov/rsb/unannotated_wisconst.pdf

p. 15

[benlurkin]

4. There could be many reasons for voting for Walker

Normally, when the populace doesn't like the policy of an elected official your normal course would be to vote them out.

I had a feeling that some of the votes for Walker would be a backlash against those who initiated the recall. The fact that through out this entire ordeal there was a great deal of outside interference from other states (Unions and big donations). Some people don't like the idea of outsiders mucking in their state's affairs. There was a voter who was quoted as saying that he would vote for Walker for this reason but would vote for Obama in November.

[Erose999]

9. But Walker was the one who got the most out-of-state $$. He's the one who brought in the Kochsuckers

and their SuperPacs and such.

[drm604]

14. So they voted for Walker because they didn't like money coming in from out of state?

Please explain how that makes even the teeniest tiniest bit of sense when you consider that Walker received the vast majority of out of state money.

[benlurkin]

30. Read my post again

I was pretty clear and I don't have the time to help you.

[drm604]

32. Read MY post again.

Nowhere did I ask for your help, nor do I need it or want it. I was just pointing out that your post doesn't make sense in the context of the real world. If you choose not to refute that, that's your decision.

[abelenkpe]

49. But you need help

Getting your facts straight on which side actually benefitted greatly from outside help. Here's a clue: it wasn't the dems.

[Shadowflash]

5. I guess.

I hope that high and mighty thinking keeps them comforted while the public schools are being decimated and wages and benefits for actual workers plummet.

[joshcryer]

6. The "screw the recall" voters were roughly 6% of the vote, in theory.

They do not make up a significant percentage of voters in that vein. The real reason Walker wasn't recalled was 30% less voters showed up than in 2008.

edit: that's actually not the real reason, that's the objective fact, the reason is probably that Walker outspent Barrett 25 to 1. For the Republicans it was like a Presidential campaign. For the democrats it was just another run of the mill off-season campaign.

[sweetloukillbot]

17. Six percent was the difference...

If six percent who would otherwise have supported Barrett voted for Walker because they were sick of recalls, that's the election.

[joshcryer]

21. Walker got 6% more votes than McCain. Barrett got 30% less than Obama.

The 6% difference comes from assuming that Walker got all of McCain's votes, and then the additional votes were because they were "screw the recall" voters. They make up 6%.

[jeff47]

50. Uh, no.

Exit polls show 60% only think recalls are appropriate for official misconduct. 10% think recalls are never appropriate.

70% thought the recall was a bad idea. That's lots more than 6%.

A good chunk of that 70% still voted to oust Walker, but not enough.

[joshcryer]

73. I hadn't looked at any exit polls when I wrote that.

I personally don't put much faith into exit surveys.

[KharmaTrain]

8. The Unions Are In Trouble...

That's what this election was about...not a mandate on President Obama. It was about Wanker's brazen attack on long-held union rights and it appears the voters of Wisconsin approved. I just saw a stat showing 36% of union households voted for the rushpublicans. This is a stinging indictment on the status of the union movement that is the real story of last night. 30 years of non-stop demonization of unions through right wing media is starting to pay off. Membership has been dropping and last night showed that it's taking a toll. If this trend isn't turned around union busting will spread...

[magical thyme]

11. my gut says you are right. nonstop demonization of unions won. nt

[benlurkin]

31. I think that is more of the reason than the money. There was a backlash.

[fasttense]

42. That is a right wing talking point.

Walker was saying it even before the Dems had a candidate.

If you merely repeat a talking point it does NOT make it true.

[sendero]

12. I tend to agree..

.... I know it is not a popular sentiment, and I'm certainly not happy about it, but unions are OVER.

The only way unions are popular is if significant numbers of people belong to them. Otherwise, it just seems to your normal workaday stiff like union members have an unfair advantage they don't have.

With public sector unions it is even worse. Whether or not these unions procured unreasonable pay/benefits for their members (and I don't really see any evidence of that here, although in some states police/fire have pension deals that a simply unfair and unpayable),the perception is pretty clear. I'm paying taxes so you can have a sweet deal.

I'm NOT saying I agree with these sentiments but I'm pretty sure they are at the root of this loss. If people really didn't like what Walker has done here they would have voted him out. They didn't. And I'm pretty sure our side's GOTV and energization was the highest. So I have to conclude that the average WI citizen agrees with Walker's actions.

Let me also add that the horrible economy gave this whole impetus an extra boost. I don't think they could have pulled it off without our dismal economy.

[Nevernose]

45. In Nevada, 5 out of the top 10 paid employees

Are firefighters or cops who gamed the sick day/overtime system to make more than half a million a year. That's for battalion chiefs and lieutenants who don't even fight fires or crimes anymore. Meanwhile, I'm in the teacher's union, where I'm mostly trying to have fewer than 50 students per class.

[angrychair]

16. You are likely right

this is a stinging rebuke on union labor in WI. I don't understand it and I don't agree with it but it doesn't change the facts. That has to be admitted because you cannot fix a problem if you don't admit there is one first. Unions need to market themselves better and get their message out there or efforts like this will bleed them dry like Rmoney wants to buy you.

[sweetloukillbot]

19. Wasn't there another candidate in the recall primary who was considered more pro-union?

I recall posts regarding another candidate who would supposedly be better than the union-busting Barrett despite trailing him by double digits.

[KharmaTrain]

26. It Wouldn't Have Mattered..

I think you're refering to a state rep from Madison who lost to Barrett in the primary. Again...the voters spoke...Barrett was the choice and from all I saw and heard the party rallied around him. This vote was one of anger...one we had hoped would be directed at Wanker and his union busting cronies but unfortunately it looks like it was directed at the unions. The unions have a serious problem of not only declining membership but now not being able to show electoral muscle...this is very sad news for all of us.

[sweetloukillbot]

27. How much is that loss of electoral muscle going to translate into Ohio and Michigan?

That's the question for the general election. I know my experiences in Iowa were pretty strong anti-union sentiment among very strong Obama supporters. And then there's West Virginia, a strong Democratic union state that hates Obama. It makes no sense to me...

[KharmaTrain]

29. All Politics Are Local...

There's a lot of moving parts that go into a national election...thus why the popularity and national polls mean little. Each state has its own unique issues that have an effect on how they'll vote come November. The big factor is and will be the economy...and hopefully voters in Ohio and Michigan will see how President Obama saved a large sector of their economy where there's no such parallel in West Virginia.

You hit on a very big problem facing unions. We don't see the solidarity that once existed...even jealousy among unions that has led to resentment. There's also a growing number of people who were once union members who are on the outside and the unions have done little to help them keep jobs yet find a new one...and an even larger number who never have been involved in a union and thus can't relate to what collective bargaining and worker solidarity is all about. I'm very pro-union but also realize there's a lot of resentment out there that needs to be addressed...

[TBF]

36. They have been in trouble the past 30 years - we are at a new low in membership

The negative campaigns on unions have worked - and we are now in a situation with low union membership, low wages, and high unemployment. Baffles the mind that folks don't see this connection, but a lot of money is thrown into this effort. Recent article -

Union Membership in U.S. Fell to a 70-Year Low Last Year
By STEVEN GREENHOUSE
Published: January 21, 2011

The number of American workers in unions declined sharply last year, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported on Friday, with the percentage slipping to 11.9 percent, the lowest rate in more than 70 years.

The report found that the number of workers in unions fell by 612,000 last year to 14.7 million, an even larger decrease than the overall 417,000 decline in the total number of Americans working.

“It was a very tough year for unionized workers,” said John Schmitt, a senior economist with the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington. “We’re seeing declines in the private sector, and we’re seeing declines in the public sector.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/22/business/22union.html

[KharmaTrain]

38. The US Became A Selfish Country...

My parents grew up during the Depression and my mother always talked about how people got together in tough times...sharing whatever they got to get by. There was a mindset that when one benefits all benefit...it was the message of the New Deal that they carried the rest of their lives. Today we live in a world where all that matters is self righteousness and/or enrichment. Our country has polarized on many levels where we see people only viewing issues in how it affects them. When issues converge, then there's some common cause, but once one cause is viewed as more important than another we see the jealousy break out. Money is at the root of this as one's self value is now based on what's in their checking account...where "free" speech now has a price tag and the public "airwaves" are the plantation of a chosen few. It's getting what someone else has and either being jealous or angry (or both) when you don't have it.

It may take a complete breakdown of social order...where poverty and desparation is more widespread than it is now but it's sad to see so many people voting against their own best interests and a once proud union movement marginalized...

[ibegurpard]

75. that's it exactly!

[sabrina 1]

15. No, it had nothing to do with voters not wanting to recall a governor. This is a talking point

started by the MSM that has suddenly appeared all over the place today, for some reason. Voters had one and a half years to make it known if they had any objection to recalling a Governor who was working to destroy the Working Class. Up to NOW, the only people who did not want Walker recalled, were Republicans.

The MSM is still powerful. Watching this talking point appear out of the blue today, and this must be the fifth or six OP making this claim, shows how easy it is for them to get their 'message' out, even to people who have followed this story since it began

Tell that story to California Voters.

To believe this false meme, you would have to believe that Democrats voted for Walker in order not to recall him simply for wanting to destroy Workers Rights. Or that they stayed home and missed an opportunity to get rid of one of the worst Republican Teabagger Governors in the country.

[benlurkin]

33. The MSM is blaming it ALL on money

I would like to know what MSM you are watching this morning because MSNBC, CNN, FOX, ABC & NBC are all blaming this on the money. Howard Dean on Morning Joe included. I've been surfin since 5 am.

What MSM am I missing that you are not?

[jeff47]

51. So your argument is people lie during exit polls?

60% thought recalls were only appropriate for official misconduct.
10% thought recalls were never appropriate.

Tell that story to California Voters.

California isn't Wisconsin. Additionally, Wisconsin has the benefit of seeing what a disaster the California recall was.

To believe this false meme, you would have to believe that Democrats voted for Walker in order not to recall him simply for wanting to destroy Workers Rights

That's what they told pollsters. In fact, a significant percentage of people who said they were going to vote for Obama in November voted for Walker yesterday. What's your evidence that they were lying?

[sabrina 1]

53. You mean that's what Republicans told pollsters.

No actual Democrat opposed the Walker recall, most were in favor of it, at least over the past one and a half years.

[jeff47]

54. Actually, 16% of Democrats voted for Walker because they objected to using recalls

(According to what was said on MSNBC)

I suppose you'll kick them out of the party next?

[sabrina 1]

59. Well, if they are voting for Republicans, especially the teabagger type, no one needs to throw them

out of the party. They ARE Republicans probably lying to pollsters. Very Rovian trick.

[jeff47]

62. Or they could be, you know, telling the truth.

Recalls are not a universal good. Unless you want to pretend the Gray Davis recall was a good thing.

I can see the argument that they did not want to encourage Republicans to recall the next Democratic governor. I don't agree with this argument, but I can see the logic in it.

[sabrina 1]

63. No real Democrat would vote for Walker, sorry. Even if they did not like the recall, which makes

zero sense to a Democrat, they would have chosen to stay home. No Dem, unless they are pretend Dems, would vote for a Teabagger. But Republicans would and have lied to pollsters, many times at the direction of Limbaugh and his ilk.

So how many Dems voted for Walker? Did they register as Republicans for the GE? If you register as a Republican you are a Republican. If you vote against the Democrats you are not a Democrat, any more than Joe Lieberman is a Democrat.

[jeff47]

64. Here's the thing: You don't get to declare who is a "real democrat" and who isn't.

One of the glories and difficulties of the Democratic party is it is not authoritarian. Since the southern realignment, we have always had a big tent. Which means someone is a "real democrat" whenever they say "I'm a Democrat". From Dennis Kucinich to Jane Harman.

It's not up to you to decide for them. You can cajole, you can argue, you can plead. But you don't get to be the purity officer.

[sabrina 1]

66. Someone voting for Scott Walker is not saying 'I am a democrat'. You don't get to call people who

vote for Teabaggers, Democrats.

Jane Harmon did not run as a Republican. Would Democrats have voted for her if she had? Your analogies do not work. Anyone who votes for a Teabagger Republican IS a Republican.

Edited to ask again, how many Democrats switched parties to vote for Scott Walker? We need to see these numbers if we are to believe the claims being made.

[jeff47]

67. Voting for Walker has nothing to do with their party affiliation

Again, you are not purity officer.

Democrats are a nice big pile of chaos doing whatever the heck they individually feel like. But as long as they say "I'm a Democrat" then they're Democrats.

Edited to ask again, how many Democrats switched parties to vote for Scott Walker?

None. Believe it or not, you are not required to vote for your party's candidate in a free election. Shocking, I know. Clearly people need to only vote their party affiliation. That way we can dispense with these silly elections and just let the party central committee select who gets to be in office.

Btw, you seem to have forgotten to toss out all the Democrats who voted for Nader. You should really get on that, since you've had 12 years to purge them.

[sabrina 1]

72. People who want to vote for teabagger Republicans have a party of their own. The Big Tent is for

Democrats. I know not one Democrat who would vote for a Republican tea bagger whose agenda is to destroy the working class. You can call yourself whatever you want, like I can call myself the Queen of England, but it is obvious to rational people that I am not. Same goes for people who vote for Republican Teabaggers. You know people by their actions, not their words.

I asked, and got no answer so far. How many people claiming to be Democrats voted for Walker?

[jeff47]

82. It's not a big tent when you keep throwing people out of it.

I asked, and got no answer so far. How many people claiming to be Democrats voted for Walker?

Actually, you did, but you keep changing your question.

16% of Democrats voted for Walker.

So, Commissar, when you gonna get around to throwing out those Nader voters?

[deutsey]

18. "Voter fatigue"

Aw, poor babies.

[jp11]

55. Maybe Walker can put in an Emergency Manager to dissolve

towns/cities then no one will have to worry about voting anymore.

[kentuck]

20. Your vote is like an investment...

Once you give money or vote for a candidate, it is difficult to change your mind and vote for someone else, no matter how big of an asshat he might be.

[Turbineguy]

23. Now what Walker will need to do

is to sell as many public assets to the Koch brothers as he can before the indictments come down.

[catbyte]

40. Isn't he trying to turn public hunting land into private?

I'd heard that's one of the things he was trying to do.

[tru]

24. Ihardly think so

There were probably a lot of voters who didn't want to keep paying highly inflated retirement benefits which come out of their own pockets.

[Botany]

25. oh please

the workers pay into those retirement funds when they are working and
that money rolls over and helps all of us when it is spent.

[Motorcycle Rider]

28. I live in Wisconsin

I don't believe any amount of money changed anyone's minds. The table was set already in mid-February. This election was not about Walker - it was about using the recall process as it was. Most Wisconsinites not think a sitting Governor should be removed except in the case of a crime.

[benlurkin]

35. Thank you!

I am getting tired of people blaming this on money. It's like everybody on TV this morning and last night got together ahead of time and decided what excuse they would use for the loss.

[fasttense]

43. But long before the election, RepubliCONS were saying voters are tired,

voters don't approve of recalls, there will be voter backlash.

This spin is used to hide what really happened. It might be money but then again Wisconsin has a history of election rigging.

[Motorcycle Rider]

58. Wisconsin does not have a history of election rigging.

Just the opposite. You might have Wisconsin confused with Chicago and Cook
County. We run clean and fair elections up here. Always have.

[TBF]

37. Any comment on the fact that he may be indicted soon?

http://bloggingblue.com/2012/06/04/david-shuster-discusses-walker-john-doe-and-criminal-corruption-on-sly-in-the-morning/

[catbyte]

41. Walker started his career on a recall

Why was THAT OK then?

[RBInMaine]

71. Yes, that was it. People just didn't feel the recall was justified, even if Walker's an asshole.

[joshcryer]

74. That was how Walker framed it with his millions of dollars of campaign funding.

That could help explain why a good chunk of democrats stayed home.

But that just goes to show that they didn't vote for their interests.

As is typical with democrats.

[99Forever]

46. Sounds like..

.. nothing more than lame excuses for a lack of support and leadership from the National Democratic Party to me.


Maybe that's just me.

[Zorra]

52. The system is a suckers game controlled by the 1%.

It may be wise to start considering networking with your local Occupy group and get a jump on the future.

[Mr Dixon]

56. IMO

Systematic brainwashing of the public, massive 63 million dollars propaganda campaign, selfish me 1st population(only concerned about their personal needs and wants), nearsighted public, Gang mentality (us against them) and dreams of one day being part of the 1%.
Outcome, more job lost, more people dropped from medical coverage, degraded working condition to include pay and wait for it…………………KOCK Brothers wet dreams coming true…money well spent.
Course of action IMO, move the Fuck out of Wisconsin, relocate to Maryland, Washington, California or DC (Plenty of jobs).

[Dokkie]

57. if you really believe this statement

"It was also about MANY voters there just not wanting to set a precedent of recalling a governor short of proven illegal activity. They felt it was an unfair do-over and that the INCUMBENT should get to finish his term even if he is something of an asshat"

then why the hell did they recall 3 senators in total? Could it be that the people of WI wanted to undercut the Union just a little bit?

[AverageJoe90]

60. Agreed.

Walker might still be in office but three State Senators were kicked to the curb. Now if only someone could to that to the Kock Bros. and Scalia, Roberts and the other crooks in the USSC.....preferably making it painful, too.

[jeff47]

65. Those were R senators that barely won in 2010

Those Rs in traditionally D or divided districts that only got in because D voters stayed home in 2010. When the D's came out, they lost.

[Javaman]

61. Money won it for him...

if all things were even aka the dems not being out spent 10-1, little scotty would be looking through the want ads today.

[BellaLuna]

70. No.. people have been brainwashed into not understanding what their best interests are anymore

NOTHING will change until they lose it all - decent pay and benefits, health insurance, clean water etc.. They simply will continue to vote against their best interests because they're not paying attention to facts and believe the media spin.


There's too much money fueling this propaganda to fight on an even playing field these days. We're going to be absolutely screwed for a generation - at least.

[Major Nikon]

81. Walker barely won with an 8-1 spending advantage

Had the spending been nearly equal, Walker would have lost. It's that simple really.