PDA

View Full Version : Wisconsin GOP Holds Off Democrats in Recall Elections



txradioguy
08-10-2011, 07:59 AM
http://a57.foxnews.com/static/managed/img/396/223/081011_wiscrecallinternal.jpg

Madison – Republicans held onto control of the Wisconsin Senate on Tuesday, defeating four Democratic challengers in a recall election despite an intense political backlash against GOP support for Gov. Scott Walker's effort to curb public employees' union rights. Fueled by millions of dollars from national labor groups, the attempt to remove GOP incumbents served as both a referendum on Walker's conservative revolution and could provide a new gauge of the public mood less than a year after Republicans made sweeping gains in this state and many others.

Two Democratic incumbents face recalls next week, but even if Democrats win those they will still be in the minority. Turnout was strong in the morning and steady in the afternoon in communities such as Whitefish Bay, Menomonee Falls and Shorewood, where Sen. Alberta Darling was one of the four Republicans to hold onto her seat.

Tony Spencer, a 36-year-old laid-off carpenter from Shorewood, voted for Darling's challenger, Democratic state Rep. Sandy Pasch. "I'm in a private union, so they haven't necessarily come after me," Spencer said. "But everybody should have the right to be in a union. I came out to stop all the union-bashing stuff."

John Gill, 45, of Menomonee Falls, voted for Darling and questioned the opposition's anti-GOP rhetoric, which went far beyond collective bargaining. "This was all supposed to be about the workers' rights, so to speak. But that has not been brought up one time. It's all been misleading, the attack ads, things like that," Gill said. "The one reason they started this recall, they didn't bring up once."

Until this year, there had been only 20 attempts since 1913 to recall any of the nation's state lawmakers from office. Just 13 of the efforts were successful.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/08/10/wisconsin-gop-holds-off-democrats-in-recall-elections/

the director
08-10-2011, 09:48 AM
What makes this even better is that despite a nationally motivated democratic party that was raging to score a victory in Wisconsin, the Republicans still managed to pull through. The dems and their union backers sunk millions of dollars a year before the national elections and lost.

I'm also glad to see the media was unbiased in their reporting of this one - the Republicans lost a couple of seats but still held on to the majority.

txradioguy
08-10-2011, 10:01 AM
What makes this even better is that despite a nationally motivated democratic party that was raging to score a victory in Wisconsin, the Republicans still managed to pull through. The dems and their union backers sunk millions of dollars a year before the national elections and lost.

I'm also glad to see the media was unbiased in their reporting of this one - the Republicans lost a couple of seats but still held on to the majority.

And there are still two Dems facing recall votes next week.

Dan D. Doty
08-10-2011, 04:14 PM
And there are still two Dems facing recall votes next week.

Wonder how they'll fare in the recall?

That outcome will tell the nation something.

Odysseus
08-10-2011, 04:25 PM
And there are still two Dems facing recall votes next week.

If they lose, then the left spent millions of dollars to maintain the status quo. Even if they win, it is a Pyrrhic victory, as they didn't win enough to accomplish their goals.

Arroyo_Doble
08-10-2011, 05:20 PM
If they lose, then the left spent millions of dollars to maintain the status quo. Even if they win, it is a Pyrrhic victory, as they didn't win enough to accomplish their goals.

In the event the Democrats up for recall maintain their seats, it changes the math in the Wisconsin Senate. Republicans only have a margin of one vote so they can only take as much action as that one vote will allow.

But I agree that this was probably a defeat for the Democrats even though they may pick up two seats. I am not sure the cost/benefit works in their favor.

ralph wiggum
08-10-2011, 05:26 PM
But I agree that this was probably a defeat for the Democrats even though they may pick up two seats. I am not sure the cost/benefit works in their favor.

It will continue to be debated until the next regular election. Some are arguing that this was a big momenutm swing for the Dems, and vice versa. Wisconsin is truly a "purple" state, and seems to embrace change from one party to the other every few years.

djones520
08-10-2011, 05:27 PM
In the event the Democrats up for recall maintain their seats, it changes the math in the Wisconsin Senate. Republicans only have a margin of one vote so they can only take as much action as that one vote will allow.

But I agree that this was probably a defeat for the Democrats even though they may pick up two seats. I am not sure the cost/benefit works in their favor.

It didn't at all. They don't care about those seats. What they cared about was a "victory". A referendum that they could have shoved in everyones faces to say "See! The people want this!".

They fell flat on that. It was $30m wasted. Even if they had taken control of the senate, they still have a Republican House, and Governer to work through. It puts them in the same spot the Republicans are in on the Federal level. They can't get a lot done even with that.

This was all about the posturing. The image it would have given them.

Constitutionally Speaking
08-10-2011, 05:31 PM
What makes this even better is that despite a nationally motivated democratic party that was raging to score a victory in Wisconsin, the Republicans still managed to pull through. The dems and their union backers sunk millions of dollars a year before the national elections and lost.

I'm also glad to see the media was unbiased in their reporting of this one - the Republicans lost a couple of seats but still held on to the majority.


Yes - and they outspent the Republicans by a 2-1 margin. I spent the night last night waiting to see the results of the Darling - Putz race. Finally got the results around 1:30 - 2:00 am this morning.

The liberals were (of course) screaming fraud (despite denying Wisconsin had any fraud when the Republicans pushed through election reforms like Voter ID etc.) They were beside themselves about the clerk in Waukesha again.

Constitutionally Speaking
08-10-2011, 05:34 PM
Wonder how they'll fare in the recall?

That outcome will tell the nation something.

From what I have heard only one is really beatable - and that might be hard to accomplish.

malloc
08-10-2011, 05:43 PM
From what I have heard only one is really beatable - and that might be hard to accomplish.

I hope we take the one, just to prevent the Dims from thinking about further recalls. (I'm not sure they can actually go after Walker with a GOP controlled Senate).

I really, really think the voters in WI need a break. I don't live there, but from what I've heard this campaign has been ugly. The GOP really doesn't need a lethargic center in WI in 2012, and the Dims sure don't want that either.

djones520
08-10-2011, 05:45 PM
I hope we take the one, just to prevent the Dims from thinking about further recalls. (I'm not sure they can actually go after Walker with a GOP controlled Senate).

I really, really think the voters in WI need a break. I don't live there, but from what I've heard this campaign has been ugly. The GOP really doesn't need a lethargic center in WI in 2012, and the Dims sure don't want that either.

I can't see a failed bid to recall Walker doing the Dem's any good though. It's just going to further alienate the common folks in the state.

malloc
08-10-2011, 05:52 PM
I can't see a failed bid to recall Walker doing the Dem's any good though. It's just going to further alienate the common folks in the state.

What i was really worried about was the dims getting their 3 seats, and then trying to recall Walker and other sitting Republicans. That would mean constant politics from now until the 2012 elections. Independents and moderates would be sick as hell of the politicking, so turnout would be way low in 2012. Except that is, among the Unions, who would organize and bus in. That sort of situation would guarantee WI for Obama, and cause the state legislature and executive to flip.

Then the spin would be that the WI public wanted public sector unions to retain their power, instead of the truth that the public was just too fed up with all of it to even bother to go to the polls.

Apocalypse
08-10-2011, 05:59 PM
http://badgerblogger.com/wp-content/uploads/ed.jpg

fettpett
08-10-2011, 06:37 PM
In the event the Democrats up for recall maintain their seats, it changes the math in the Wisconsin Senate. Republicans only have a margin of one vote so they can only take as much action as that one vote will allow.

But I agree that this was probably a defeat for the Democrats even though they may pick up two seats. I am not sure the cost/benefit works in their favor.

ah, no it's 17-14 if the Dems keep their seats

djones520
08-10-2011, 06:40 PM
ah, no it's 17-14 if the Dems keep their seats

17-16. It was 19-14 before last night.

fettpett
08-10-2011, 06:42 PM
17-16. It was 19-14 before last night.

I must have misread something, it's been a long week and haven't been getting a lot of sleep

djones520
08-10-2011, 06:44 PM
I must have misread something, it's been a long week and haven't been getting a lot of sleep

http://legis.wisconsin.gov/senhome.htm

Odysseus
08-11-2011, 09:59 AM
In the event the Democrats up for recall maintain their seats, it changes the math in the Wisconsin Senate. Republicans only have a margin of one vote so they can only take as much action as that one vote will allow.

But I agree that this was probably a defeat for the Democrats even though they may pick up two seats. I am not sure the cost/benefit works in their favor.
It doesn't. Even if you just look at the money spent against the result, the unions lost, and if either of the two Democrats loses, then it becomes even more obvious. If both lose, then they spent a fortune to maintain the status quo.

But, beyond the financial cost, the unions and Democrats (is there a difference at this point), lost much more than they gained. The real risk of defying unions has always been their reprisal at the ballot box, especially during off-year or special elections, when lower turnout favors their organizational and funding abilities. This time, the electorate rejected their attack, and demonstrated that politicians who support principled positions on public employee unions can survive their onslaught. It also had to depress their base, which had high hopes of taking back the Wisconsin senate, and the ugly tone of the union attacks and the obvious greed and disdain for the taxpayers demonstrated by the unions has alienated a major part of the electorate.

Finally, this demonstrates just how vulnerable the Democrats are in 2012. Obama is very likely to lose Wisconsin in the general election, and Wisconsin has been a solidly blue state for decades. If that happens, can he count on any of the other states that he carried by even smaller percentages?

Arroyo_Doble
08-11-2011, 10:07 AM
Finally, this demonstrates just how vulnerable the Democrats are in 2012. Obama is very likely to lose Wisconsin in the general election, and Wisconsin has been a solidly blue state for decades. If that happens, can he count on any of the other states that he carried by even smaller percentages?

If Obama loses Wisconsin in 2012, it is a massive, landslide defeat. Wisconsin is deep into his electoral math. I would put that on the same electoral level as Arizona is for Republicans.

txradioguy
08-11-2011, 10:10 AM
Finally, this demonstrates just how vulnerable the Democrats are in 2012. Obama is very likely to lose Wisconsin in the general election, and Wisconsin has been a solidly blue state for decades. If that happens, can he count on any of the other states that he carried by even smaller percentages?

And lets not forget too that by the time November 2012 rolls around the new...redrawn district map for Wisconsin that's already been approved and signed by the Governor will be in effect in Wisconsin.

IMHO this was the last best shot the Dems had of holding onto Wisconsin.

ralph wiggum
08-11-2011, 10:34 AM
If Obama loses Wisconsin in 2012, it is a massive, landslide defeat. Wisconsin is deep into his electoral math. I would put that on the same electoral level as Arizona is for Republicans.

I wouldn't call it a massive defeat. Reagan won it twice, Nixon won in '72. Gore narrowly beat Bush in 2000. They've elected Republican governors several times in recent memory.

Obama might call it a massive defeat...it just depends on how things are polling in about a year.

Odysseus
08-11-2011, 10:41 AM
If Obama loses Wisconsin in 2012, it is a massive, landslide defeat. Wisconsin is deep into his electoral math. I would put that on the same electoral level as Arizona is for Republicans.
My point exactly. He's looking at Jimmy Carter numbers circa 1980.

Articulate_Ape
08-11-2011, 05:28 PM
The Republican victory in Wisconsin will not last. It will be short-lived as the mighty Left rises in resistance, led by the likes of brilliant Liberals like the Reverend Al Sharpton! Who can stand against the erudite and eloquence of such men? Give it up Conservatives, while you can!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqQe4KOrvsM

djones520
08-11-2011, 05:38 PM
The Republican victory in Wisconsin will not last. It will be short-lived as the mighty Left rises in resistance, led by the likes of brilliant Liberals like the Reverend Al Sharpton! Who can stand against the erudite and eloquence of such men? Give it up Conservatives, while you can!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqQe4KOrvsM

God that channel drives me nuts.

I see all these people whine about how "partisan" Fox is, and it just makes me want to slap them. CONservative Job is one of Sharptons segments.

Show me a single Fox show that does something like "Lib Lies". :rolleyes:

Articulate_Ape
08-11-2011, 06:03 PM
God that channel drives me nuts.

I see all these people whine about how "partisan" Fox is, and it just makes me want to slap them. CONservative Job is one of Sharptons segments.

Show me a single Fox show that does something like "Lib Lies". :rolleyes:

Did you understand what he said? If so, please tell me WTF he said.

djones520
08-11-2011, 06:08 PM
Did you understand what he said? If so, please tell me WTF he said.

My brain shuts down when his mouth opens. So no, I couldn't tell you what he said.

fettpett
08-11-2011, 06:28 PM
Did you understand what he said? If so, please tell me WTF he said.

I don't think even RUSH could decipher his dribble, he was making fun of his crap the other day for what Sharpton said on Tuesday.

txradioguy
08-12-2011, 03:24 AM
The Republican victory in Wisconsin will not last. It will be short-lived as the mighty Left rises in resistance, led by the likes of brilliant Liberals like the Reverend Al Sharpton! Who can stand against the erudite and eloquence of such men? Give it up Conservatives, while you can!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqQe4KOrvsM




http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_081111/content/01125115.Par.89380.ImageFile.jpg

Odysseus
08-12-2011, 08:55 AM
God that channel drives me nuts.

I see all these people whine about how "partisan" Fox is, and it just makes me want to slap them. CONservative Job is one of Sharptons segments.

Show me a single Fox show that does something like "Lib Lies". :rolleyes:

The closest thing that you will find is something like Bill O'Reilly's Pinheads or Patriots.

My question is, why would anyone put someone with Sharpton's record on the air? From Discoverthenetworks.org:



Founder of the National Action Network
Helped incite anti-Jewish riots in Crown Heights, New York in 1991
Convicted of libel for his role in the racially charged Tawana Brawley hoax
Incited black anti-Semites against a Jewish business establishment in Harlem in 1995
Democratic Party presidential candidate, 2004

Sharpton is ignorant:

After attending Brooklyn College for two years, Sharpton dropped out and had no additional higher education or formal seminary training. He soon began working (as a tour manager) for the entertainer James Brown and, later, for boxing promoter Don King. In 1978, Sharpton made an unsuccessful run for the New York State Senate.
He's a crook:

A 2002 telecast of HBO’s Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel showed a 1983 FBI surveillance video in which Sharpton could be seen discussing a money-laundering scheme with mobster-turned-informant Michael Franzese, onetime captain for the Colombo crime family. On the tape, Sharpton appeared to offer to broker a meeting between Don King and a South American drug lord. No indictments were filed.

He's a liar and a fraud whose actions have caused irreparable harm to the nation, not to mention a deadbeat:

Sharpton first entered America's national consciousness on a large scale in November 1987, when he injected himself into the case of a 15-year-old black girl named Tawana Brawley, who claimed that she had been abducted and raped by a gang of six whites in Dutchess County, New York. Despite a complete absence of any credible evidence to support Miss Brawley's story, Sharpton (along with attorneys Alton Maddox and C. Vernon Mason) made increasingly wild accusations, culminating in charges that then-Dutchess County assistant prosecutor Steven Pagones had participated in the girl's brutalization. An extensive and costly investigation eventually proved Brawley’s tale to be without factual basis, and a grand jury dismissed her accusations.

When Pagones in 1997 sued Sharpton (as well as Maddox and Mason) for defamation of character, Sharpton, under oath, said he could “no longer recall” having made a number of his slanderous accusations against Pagones and other law-enforcement officials years earlier. Pagones won a $345,000 court judgment against Sharpton and his two accomplices, of which Sharpton was responsible for $65,000. But Sharpton never paid his debt; rather, it was paid (along with $22,000 in interest) in 2001 by a group of wealthy Sharpton supporters.
He is a virulent bigot and race bater:

In 1991... anti-Semitic riots erupted in Brooklyn’s Crown Heights section after a Hasidic Jewish driver accidentally ran over and killed a 7-year-old black boy. Within three hours, a black mob had hunted down and slain an innocent rabbinical student, Yankel Rosenbaum, in retribution. Sharpton declared that it was not merely a car accident that had killed the black child, but rather the "social accident" of "apartheid." He organized angry demonstrations and challenged local Jews––whom he derisively called "diamond merchants"––to “pin their yarmulkes back and come over to my house” to settle the score. Stirred in part by such rhetoric, hundreds of Crown Heights blacks took violently to the streets for three days and nights of rioting. Sharpton reacted to the chaos by stating, “We must not reprimand our children for outrage, when it is the outrage that was put in them by an oppressive system.”
An enabler of other bigots:

In 1995 Sharpton--along with such notables as Jeremiah Wright and Barack Obama--helped organize Louis Farrakhan's October 16th Million Man March.
An inciter of hatred and a demagogue whose rants have directly motivated violent actions:

Also in 1995, Sharpton led his NAN in a racially charged boycott against Freddy’s Fashion Mart, a Jewish-owned business in Harlem. The boycott started when Freddy’s owners announced that because they wanted to expand their own business, they would no longer sublet part of their store to a black-owned record shop. The street leader of the boycott, Morris Powell, was also the head of Sharpton’s “Buy Black” Committee. Powell and his fellow protesters repeatedly and menacingly told passersby not to patronize the “crackers” and "the greedy Jew bastards [who are] killing our [black] people." Some boycotters openly threatened violence against whites and Jews––all under the watchful, approving eye of Sharpton, who referred to the proprietors of Freddy's as "white interlopers." The subsequent picketing became ever-more menacing in its tone until one of the participants eventually shot (non-fatally) four whites inside the store and then set the building on fire––killing seven employees, most of whom were Hispanics.
And still more hatred:

In August 2000, Sharpton held a "Redeem the Dream" rally at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, DC, where one the the featured speakers was Malik Zulu Shabazz. At that event, Shabazz called on black young people, including "gang members," to unite against their "common enemy" -- "white America" and its allegedly racist police departments. He also articulated a "black dream that when we see caskets rolling in the black community … we will see caskets and funerals in the community of our enemy as well."

And, he's a sleazy shake-down artist:


Sharpton often threatens to organize black boycotts of corporations on grounds that they supposedly discriminate against African Americans. Those companies, in turn, commonly try to pacify Sharpton with cash; sometimes they hire him as a consultant. For example:


In June 1998 Sharpton threatened to call for a consumer boycott of Pepsi, alleging that blacks were underrepresented in the company's advertising. Less than a year later, Pepsi hired Sharpton as a $25,000-per-year adviser until 2007.
In November 2003, Sharpton threatened to lead a boycott of DaimlerChrysler over the allegedly pervasive “institutional racism” in the company’s car loan practices. Within six months, Chrysler began supporting Sharpton's NAN conferences.
Also in 2003, Sharpton complained that American Honda had too few blacks in management positions. Company executives met with Sharpton, and within two months they began to sponsor NAN events.
According to one General Motors spokesman, NAN repeatedly asked his company for contributions every year from 2000 through 2006, and GM each time declined to pay anything. Then, in December 2006 Sharpton threatened to call a boycott to protest the carmaker’s closing of an African American-owned GM dealership in the Bronx. In 2007 and 2008, General Motors made monetary donations to NAN.

Oh, and did I mention that he's a crook?

In April 2009, Sharpton and his NAN were fined $285,000 for having violated election rules during Sharpton's 2004 presidential bid. According to the Federal Election Commission:
Sharpton's campaign illegally accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars in extravagant contributions from private sources.
Sharpton's campaign “kept poor records of its activities and expenditures” and illegally commingled funds from the nonprofit NAN with his for-profit ventures.
Sharpton lied to authorities regarding the amount of money he had raised during his 2004 campaign--so as to illegally qualify for federal matching funds.


No decent network would want a career criminal with a history of obviously false statements as one of their hosts. However, he's perfect for MSNBC.