From what I've seen on television and read on the issues in the recall, I, too, hope Walker wins, because I believe that those who vote against him in Wisconsin are voting against fiscal responsibility.
The folks at policymic.com have aptly provided the history of the recall, and have stated the case as to why Walker should and WILL win. Here are the highlight's of Jesse Merkel's article:
"Nearly a year and a half ago, then newly minted Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker (R) instituted sweeping reforms to help ease his states $3.6 billion budget deficit. Part of this plan included a requirement for public service employees to make a reasonable contribution to their health plans and pensions."
"While still much less than what most in the private sector would pay, this reform set off a nationwide firestorm, and arguably the first ‘occupation’ of 2011, as the teachers unions crowded into the capital building in Madison for nearly two straight weeks. The reforms were passed, and went into effect shortly after. The past six months have been a constant build up, as hundreds of thousands of signatures were rounded up in an attempt to force a recall vote for both Governor Walker and Lt. Governor Rebecca Kleefisch."
"Today is the day, and much to the utter shock of the unions and liberals in Wisconsin, Scott Walker is favored to win. If he does walk away with a victory, it could prove to be a devastating blow to unions not only in Wisconsin, but across the country. It would be a sign that progress can be made without funneling hundreds of millions of dollars into the pockets of union bosses."
"If Walker’s reforms had been an abysmal failure, then he would already be packing his bags; but that's not the case. Wisconsin is the best it has been in decades, and the governor has had a lot to do with it. Walker has helped to turn a $3.6 billion budget deficit into a $154 million surplus. Over 35,000 new jobs have been added since Walker's reforms. Property taxes were decreased for he first time in 12 years and the state has saved more than a billion dollars in spending."
"Wisconsinites are feeling the effects of Walker's reforms. The more jobs become abundant and disposable income becomes noticeable, the better people feel about their state and its leadership. While six months ago people were unsure of how Walker’s union busting would work, it’s now apparent that it was the right thing to do."
"One thing is for sure. Scott Walker is going to win. For the first time in over 20 years, Wisconsin is on the rise. Thousands of hours of protests and millions of dollars cannot stop a message that has actually produced results."
Is Merkel correct? I guess we'll find out (hopefully) in a couple of hours from now.
Well it appears that good sense has prevailed in the dairy state.
I think it is or used to be called that.
Yes - I believe that's one of their state "mottos." They are also called The Badger State - among others:
I can't say I was too surprised that their "good sense" prevailed. Being born and raised in the great state of Illinois - and being a lifetime fan of those Chicago Bears - I have often questioned the ancestry of Green Bay Packer fans, but never their good sense (or is it "good cents?")
And now we have the spin. The Repubs say that the results of the referendum on Walker also portend the results of a referendum on the President and the economy in November. The Dems say it just means that Walker gets to keep his job.
I think that the results and Walker's strategy to get there provide Romney with the clearest roadmap yet to the White House.
...and here's a pretty good analysis of last night's cable "news" coverage of the event:
I watched a bit of coverage on all three networks cited in the article (CNN, FNC, MSNBC). To me, it appeared that Byers' comments were spot on about MSNBC and CNN. But his own slanted slip was showing in his comments about FNC. What I saw wasn't "blatant partisan coverage," in fact they had commentators providing the "spin" for BOTH sides. They also covered the REPUBS OWN VICTORY CELEBRATIONS (I saw no hats or confetti in the FNC ctudio) - which is hardly surprising since the recall "race" was of such bitter intensity that no matter who won there was bound to be a huge celebration by the winners.
.....and speaking of spin:
According to the Washinton Post, Walker's 7 point win (53% to 46%) was a "close vote." See:
However, I don't recall them saying it was a "close vote" when President Obama beat John McCain in the 2008 Presidential election by the same popular vote margin of 52.9% to 45.7%. In fact, Time Magazine called Obama's win a "Mandate For Change." See:
The questions in November will be:
*Did we get it (change, that is)?
*Do we like it?
...and check out these SORE LOSERS:
and especially (re: my MSNBC assessment of their bias above):
Looks like you fellas got a winner from the Cheeseheads. 66% of Walkers money came from outside the state. He basically beat his opponent by relatively the same margin in the General Election. He outspent him 7-1 in this one.
This may or may not be a bell weather of things to come nationally. I do know now, that we have the race that that many have wanted for the Oval Office. It is going to be brutal fight to the finish line.
If their is a recount tho in any state for the Presidential race, I hope it is in Hawaii and not Wisconsin.
Hi Jimmy. Yes - remember that the word "cheesehead" begins with "ch," and ends with "ad." So let's hope their "chads" ain't hanging in November.
As to the money (not monkey) business - as one talking head put it last night:
No matter who spent what, it still came down to who voted for who.
The cheesheads KNEW what they were getting in the two candidates, since one was elected governor less than two years ago and the other was mayor of Milwaukee. So there really were no "surprises" in the matchup - especially since Barrett was Walker's opponent in 2010.
The voters were basically voting on whether they should "stay the course" or "change bits in the middle of a screw." Despite all of the dirt that had been thrown up against Walker FROM ACROSS THE NATION and in television/radio/robocalls - and despite the Dems own highly-touted "grass roots" get-out-the-vote/smear campaign - Walker STILL won by a greater margin than he did the first time around. (But then again, maybe the recall is still going on - I think CNN is still "counting the votes.")
I don't think it's a bellwether for how "swing" states will go in November, but as I said I DO think it gives Romney a roadmap of how to win. Here's the way I'd tell him to sell it:
Do you want to "stay the course," or do you want somebody who will make the tough decisions, actually PASS A BUDGET, and reverse the trend of out-of-control big government and government spending?
But his genius advisors will probably come up with a different approach. Also, the more I see Rubio, the better he looks. No intellectual lightweight is he - and it will be much harder for the opposition to "disenfranchise" his latino heritage from the "true believers" who will undoubtedly (as Obama's did in 2008) vote for his ticket NO MATTER WHAT.
Yes - the game is on. I usually root for the underdog in cases where I don't like any of the candidates on either side. That's why I actually pulled for Obama in 2008, even though I didn't vote for him.
You can't consider Obama the underdog this time - no matter how much money Romney raises. He's the President; he's running for reelection; and I'm evaluating him on his own PERFORMANCE - not on the ability of he and his surrogates to throw dirt on Romney.
It will be interesting to see how the rest of the country looks at it in November.
...but here's a perfect illustration of the choice the voters will have in November. It's a "gift" as it were from Nancy Pelosi. It also explains why the DEMS are just as responsible for the gridlock in Washington as the Repubs.
In a Roll Call item titled: "Nancy Pelosi Remembers 25 Years in Congress," the former House Speaker reveals a despicable strategy that the Dems use all the time, but they have always denied it....until now:
"...Pelosi recalled how Democrats defeated Bush’s Social Security proposal after the 2004 presidential election.
Bush, whom Pelosi called “really a lovely man” despite their disagreements, had discussed allowing individuals to invest their Social Security payroll taxes in personal retirement accounts, which Democrats dubbed “privatizing” Social Security.
Bush’s proposal was a “gift,” Pelosi said, adding that the key to Democrats’ success was resisting entreaties to offer their own plan to shore up Social Security’s finances.
Without a Democratic plan to confuse the issue, the attacks against Bush’s plan had more resonance, Pelosi said."
And that pretty much tells the whole story. Rather than working for the American people and ACTUALLY DOING SOMETHING to solve the social security problem, the Dems chose (and still do) to NOT HAVE A PLAN "to confuse the issue," so as to ensure their "attacks against Bush's plan had more resonance."
I always knew this was happening - even though they said otherwise - but it's nice to see Pelosi finally CONFIRMING it. DO NOTHING SO YOU HAVE NOTHING TO BE CRITICIZED ABOUT. THIS IS LEADERSHIP? THIS IS WHAT WE ARE PAYING OUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES TO DO?
If I were the Repubs, I would jump on this like stink on manure.
And a great big: Enjoy It While It Lasts TOT, Enjoy It While It Lasts. We have not brought out the big guns yet. Little or no National Dem Money went in to Wisconsin and we still have money, the machine, and the best Campaigner on the planet in Barrack Obama.
It ain't over till the fat lady sings!
This was a senseless recall because there was no corruption or mismanagement by Govenor Walker. The Big Union Democrats wanted him out for doing what he said he would do.
This "news" certainly won't help the President:
This won’t help either; we are not idiots!
During the post-recall "analysis" on one of the cable news channels (I think it was CNN), one of the liberal talking heads grudgingly admitted that the results would probably "put Wisconsin in play" for the November elections. But she then basically said that wouldn't happen to other states which "lean Obama" in the midwest - particularly Michigan.
....and now two out of three Americans believe that ObamaCare should be "struck down" (either partially or entirely) by the Supreme Court.
I can't believe all of this bad news for the administration in such a short time. It sure seems like the stars are in alignment for Obama to lose.
Congress could help him out by actually DOING something. After all, the Senate is still controlled by the Democrats. Also, something needs to be done to offset all the damage that is being done by the President's own surrogates (especially Bill Clinton).
Here’s some more breaking news, the only Democrat to win re-election for President since FDR is Bill Clinton and President Obama is no Clinton. He is divisive, anti-capitalist with a rigid anti- American perspective on free markets. Government is always the solution for him. After losing the midterm elections in Congress to the Republicans in 1994 he compromised with Newt Gingrich and left a surplus in 2000. Senator BHO said he would cut the deficit in half, reach across party lines, not pass healthcare with a 50 + 1 vote, change politics as we know it; however we find out that Reverend Wright was right when BHO threw him off the bus and said “he’s just another politician.”
Yes - it sure looks like voter disillusionment, broken campaign promises, and bad economic circumstances are at work in favor of Romney. I am REALLY looking forward to the debates now.
In 2008 President Obama said to talk about Reverend Wright was a legitimate issue. So when they attack Romney on this issue, it is perfectly alright since BHO said so and he considered Wright to be a father figure. Check out the facts here presented by Larry Elder; Jeremiah Wright still Matters Part 1&II.
Chief MVP, I'm sorry to say that you are a far right wing ideologue because Sean Hannity has Stanley Kurtz on his show right now at 9:25 pm exposing President Obama’s third party FAR LEFT affiliation called The New Party and his commitment from 1996. Shame on you sir to report all the facts and truth’s like Fox News.
Additionally, you make your honest mistakes as they do, including me and a host of fellow bloggers; however only a few of us admit it like true patriots should.
Hi Funky: I guess it's just because we right wing ideologues actually DO make mistakes (unlike the lefties), and we are too stupid to be able to cover them up effectively.
(Or - another explanation might be that we expect to be accountable for our words and deeds, and are willing to admit error....)
...but back to politics - things seem to be going downhill very fast for the President:
The best campaigner on the planet has proven himself to be little more than an empty suit with a mouth and little or no understanding about the world of free enterprise and capitalism which is the backbone of American exceptionalism.
I think that when all is said and done regardless of whether Obama serves a single term or should he be reelected, in the end he will have dethroned Jimmy Carter as the worst President in modern times.
It's the economy stupid.
He certainly doesn't seem to be at the top of his game - that's for sure. I think Bill Clinton is actually working AGAINST Obama - in a stealth sort of way - so that he can position Hillary to run in 2016 against a one-term Romney rather than the country having to decide whether it wants 12 consecutive years of Democrats in the White House.
If Obama does lose, I think it will be as a result of three things:
*What you said - his apparent inability to "manage" the economy (if that's possible). He has shown neither a desire nor an ability to LEAD the Congress - let alone the country. His recent gaffe statement that "the private sector is doing fine" only tends to reinforce the Republican argument that Obama DOES NOT "feel our pain."
*Being boxed in by his VP on the "gay marriage" issue, and having to come out of the closet on it. Despite what the NOW leadership and others say, the majority of women DO NOT support the bastardization of marriage into the Democrat's vision of it. Check the polls - he had a wide margin with women before he "came out" - since then, Romney is making steady gains as time goes by. Last poll I saw he was basically DEAD EVEN with Romney in the category of women voters. I predict he will win men with a large majority (7-10 points or so). If he loses women too he might as well pack his bags.
*The incompetence of his reelection apparatus and the fumble-tonguing of his surrogates. Over the last two weeks, there has been an extraordinary number of gaffes and blunders, and the team doesn't appear able (or willing, actually) to stay united and on message. Part of the problem is that even an idiot can see that the Dems economic solutions are NOT WORKING - so the defense of them is an incredibly difficult job to do (especially with a straight face). The other thing is that the Executive Branch and the Democrats in Congress haven't shown an ability to work together toward a common goal for the past 3 1/2 years. It may be impossible for them to pull together now at the 11th hour in order to get the President reelected. It just seems like they are bumbling, fumbling, stumbling around ala a Chinese fire drill. The way they do it makes Romney's election crew look good - and professional - and that's bad for Obama.
.....but it does appear that Florida is "in play" for November:
I hope the entire country is in play for November.
Even so it will be difficult to oust Obama.
Simply too many left wing liberals who love socialism.