And Walker and Pubs shouldn't read too much into this either.

[RBInMaine]

Walker won because a majority of the WI voters did not think a recall was warranted. 16% were Dems. They won the Indies. And Obama wins with this electorate by 12%. Many of these folks don't like Walker much. It was a vote of principle. They just didn't approve of the recall. Those who turned the election for Walker did not do so out of an abiding love of Walker.

Yes, the Pubs will put a lot of cash once again into November. But right now Team Obama is in command. What Dems have to do is bear up, re-tune their messaging, and get back into gear TOMORROW MORNING organizing for November and working to defeat the Pubs in the fall. The Pubs remain EXTREME in their idiology, and we have TONS of ammunition on a range of issues, the economy at the top.

Get re-organized, get the right message, and move on to the next battle. WI is going to be a major league batteground. Dems and TeamObama can win it.

[HiPointDem]

1. baloney.

[RBInMaine]

3. Live in utter nonreality and denial of you want, but it is what it is, and it is indisputabe.

Guess you haven't read the polling. So I'll make it nice and easy for you: THEY DID NOT FAVOR THE RECALL regardless of what an asshat he is. Is that clear enough?
It wasn't fraud. And while the money helped energize the Pub base, with even money on both sides Walker would still have won. A majority in WI does not want to recall a sitting governor absent confirmed illegal behavior. The WisDems shot too high and missed. They should have focused on messaging for the fall (a constant narrative that Walker is the "rock start of the far right" and doesn't have the state's interest at heart, that he and his TeaNuts are too extreme, etc.) and retaking the legislature while in the meantime allowing Walker to hang himself with his rotten manner of governing.

[HiPointDem]

4. baloney.

[RBInMaine]

13. Sounds like you've been stuffing a lot of baloney in your ears. Ah, ignorance is bliss isn't it?

[DoBotherMe]

2. 24/7 the GOP ran ads that said a recall was undemocratic

that's why voters listed it as a reason to vote for walker. The election was bought and paid for by corporate, outside money. The candidate with the most money always wins. Dana ; )

[cigsandcoffee]

9. Tell that to Meg Whitman. n/t

[RBInMaine]

14. Just not so. We have had MANY races in Maine where the person with far less money won.

[DoBotherMe]

17. Occupy Wall Street protester's sign says 94 percent of deeper-pocketed candidates win

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/oct/17/occupy-wall-street/occupy-wall-street-protesters-sign-says-94-percent/

Ratigan said "there is a single statistic that I think is the only statistic that you need to understand about money and politics in America. … If you look at campaign for federal office, Congress, president, whatever, … if I know who raised more money, without even knowing anything else, 94 percent of the time I will pick the winner."

In congressional races in 2010, the candidate who spent the most won 85 percent of the House races and 83 percent of the Senate races, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. That’s a large percentage, but it’s lower than what the sign indicated.

Indeed, the percentage for 2010 was lower than it had been in recent election cycles. The center found that in 2008, the biggest spenders won 93 percent of House races and 86 percent of Senate races. In 2006, the top spenders won 94 percent of House races and 73 percent of Senate races. And in 2004, 98 percent of House seats went to candidates who spent the most, as did 88 percent of Senate seats.

[Blue_Tires]

5. I'm sorry, I refuse to believe the narrative that this many people

voted for him in the recall because:

1. They are too ignorant to know or care about the issues and couldn't give a shit to find out what got the recall started in the first place

2. The knew the issues and hated Walker's policies, but, you know, voted for him anyway just to piss off the people who had the nerve to organize a recall and inconvenience everyone...

[HereSince1628]

6. People like simple analysis of complex problems...recalls=bad is a simple answer, it was accepted

by too many.

You can refuse to believe it. I am fine with that. I hope that you;re so well off that when the ALEC-legislators in your state come after traditional values you can still sit back and say I refuse to believe it!

The lesson is this: As strange as the lessons seem, ignoring the evidence from Wisconsin is done at your own peril.

[Blue_Tires]

8. My point of it is

Walker's camp from the start needed to prop up and hide behind the meme that this recall was just an unjustified/unnecessary/sour grapes charade because it draws attention away from all the bullshit he's done in office...

They need to maintain the "people voted against the recall on principle" ruse now, because it draws attention away from how much money flowed into his campaign, where it came from, and who gave it to him...I know there are probably plenty who did this, but nowhere near as many as the MSM are claiming....

[HereSince1628]

10. Well Walker started saying that last June. He had almost a year, and tens of millions of dollars

to spread that meme on right-wing am radio to which you and I don't normally listen.

A YEAR, many millions...repeat meme, repeat meme, repeat meme. Over many months that took hold of man people.

Screw the people's principles. They succumbed to a psychological phenomenon known as adaptation. They heard that message so often for so they simply came to accept it as part of "the way the world works" Yesterday suggests that the number of people who accepted that were far more than what any recall supporter thought possible.

I agree with you that it is very dangerous to take away the simple and obvious and think that those things hold the explanation on how the recall of Walker failed. It's dangerous to grant power where it doesn't actually exist.

But the reality is that meme and it's corrosive power was active for a long time.

[RBInMaine]

11. You are foolish though to blame it ALL on the money. THAT is what is SIMPLISTIC.

Absolutely the big money helped to energized the R base and financed their ground operation. But voters in places like WI are not so gullible as to simply be "brainwashed by ads" as some would like to think. This was Walker's to lose, and he didn't lose it because enough Wisconsinites simply on principle did not support the idea of the recall. That is what every poll says by large margins. You ignore it at your peril. He won 16% of the Dems and a majority of the Indies. What does that telll you? Were those DEMS and Indies brainwashed too?

This was a risky recall move that diverted energy from what they could have done: spent time building the narrative of Walker and the R's there as divisive right wing extremists, building SUPPORT for unionization and why it is a good thing for workers, and working to defeat the Pubs in November.

It was a very risky call, and they missed. Now just stand up, dust off, learn what went right and what went wrong, and re-plan and engage for the fall.

[Blue_Tires]

15. Hey...If that many Dems and indies think he's such a swell guy

they can have him, and I'll burn no more of my energy on the matter...

[RBInMaine]

12. It is naive and simplistic to assert that all those folks were "brainwashed" by the ads. Not so.

See my post below.

[ingac70]

7. Running a guy who already lost to him before didn't help....

stupid, stupid....

[99Forever]

16. No kidding..

... and that barely get a mention. Add in, no significant help from the National Democratic Party or Obama Administration. Talk about a recipe for failure.