[Edit to add: thanks for thinking to link to the results page, PhoenixRev. I was watching that in realtime earlier, but didn't think to share it here. Looks like we've cleared the first hurdle in this process.]
No problem, DS. I have been following the results all night.
Interesting factoid: I have now heard or read several times tonight that turnout was a lot higher than anticipated.
This is outstanding; good on Wisconsin voters.
Who funded the fake candidates?
I think those charts are mis-labeled. They say "turnout as a percentage of April turnout", but then the April turnout is on the first chart as just under 30%. I'm confused about what the percentages actually mean. Are they voter turnout (percent of registered voters) or voter turnout as a percentage of something else?
Higher turnout was due to people coming out to vote for the protest candidates.
Oh, is that what they are now, MattDaddy? "Protest candidates?" Not 'ringers'?
Is there anything that Republicans do that you don't agree with? How unethical do they have to GET before you realize that they are, in fact, unethical?
MattDaddy, as a fiscal conservative who opposed the recount in the recent very close race for State Supreme Court, how do you feel about upwards of $400,000 of taxpayer money being spent on primaries with fake candidates?
I am not a supporter of fielding fake/protest/placeholder candidates in any race. I do not want to be wasting money on an extra round of elections. I would not have come up with this as a solution to the problem. The problem being that the GOP incumbents were put at a disadvantage by the timing of the elections.
I think the GAB made a mistake by scheduling the Republican recalls earlier than the Democratic ones. That process smells of bias, but nothing has been proven.
I also think this recall process as a whole is a waste. These 9 elections are wasting money too, and I don't agree with recalling a bunch of elected officials (on either side) because of their stance on one issue.
1) It's a term that's been used in many articles and new stories, not one I made up.
2) Yes, and if you'd bother to search this forum you'd find some here. I bet you even know of a few, but to admit that would take away from your insane ranting against me.
3) Every time I post all you can do is rant at me like an enraged lunatic. Is this the kind of behavior that got you a time out from P&C the last time?
Edit: So I see Malor edited his original comment about me being fine with the GOP burning babies and such. I'm leaving my original response to him, as it addresses his actions towards me. I know what the original post said, even if those coming in late will now never see it (next time I'll quote it).
If folks need to hammer out personal issues, can it please happen outside of this thread? I will be bummed if this gets locked and I have to create yet another WI thread to track events as they unfold.
FYI, my response was to his original post, which was far more inflammatory than what he eventually edited it to be.
Dimmerswitch wrote:MattDaddy, as a fiscal conservative who opposed the recount in the recent very close race for State Supreme Court, how do you feel about upwards of $400,000 of taxpayer money being spent on primaries with fake candidates?
I am not a supporter of fielding fake/protest/placeholder candidates in any race. I do not want to be wasting money on an extra round of elections. I would not have come up with this as a solution to the problem. The problem being that the GOP incumbents were put at a disadvantage by the timing of the elections.
I'm sorry, but "put at a disadvantage"? They went against the will of their constituency, and so the constituency went through proper channels to remove people from office that clearly did not represent said constituency. Your comments read like you are actively ignoring the prior actions of the Republican incumbents that lead to this situation in the first place.
I think the GAB made a mistake by scheduling the Republican recalls earlier than the Democratic ones. That process smells of bias, but nothing has been proven.
That the results of the GOP recalls were more clear-cut than those of the Democrat recalls doesn't really read as bias to me. Granted, I don't know the entire situation like the back of my hand, but from what I've read, the Democrats did not have out-of-state organizations trying to muscle their way into the state to affect the process. In my eyes, such evidence requires further scrutiny. It is not the Democrat's nor the GAB's fault that the Republicans didn't already have someone in the party ready to run for the election, especially knowing full well that the recalls were coming.
I also think this recall process as a whole is a waste. These 9 elections are wasting money too, and I don't agree with recalling a bunch of elected officials (on either side) because of their stance on one issue.
The recall process is a Democratic/Constitutional process that should further remind us as citizens that we still do, in fact, hold the power in this country. We put people into official positions to represent us, and should they fail to do so-- egregiously in the case of the WI GOP incumbent-- the people have the right to put in motion the effort to remove them. Even that process is a democratic one-- it's not as if the recall process is simply "replace one party member with someone of the opposite political party." They set up a democratic election so the people can vote fairly for who will take the seat. Even then, the recall wasn't a result of those GOPs' stance-- it was a result of their efforts to bulldoze a law through the system in spite of the majority crying foul.
Personally, I feel that the money spent on these recall elections is money to solidify the democratic process, and so it is money well spent.
That the results of the GOP recalls were more clear-cut than those of the Democrat recalls doesn't really read as bias to me. Granted, I don't know the entire situation like the back of my hand, but from what I've read, the Democrats did not have out-of-state organizations trying to muscle their way into the state to affect the process. In my eyes, such evidence requires further scrutiny. It is not the Democrat's nor the GAB's fault that the Republicans didn't already have someone in the party ready to run for the election, especially knowing full well that the recalls were coming.
They still should have scheduled the recalls for the same day, even if some of them took longer to approve. I'm not sure what you mean about the Republicans didn't have someone ready to run for the election. The ones running in the election are currently elected officials busy working in Madison. They already knew who would be there, but the argument is that they did not have enough time to campaign compared to the Democrat challengers, who are not currently busy with being in Madison.
Even then, the recall wasn't a result of those GOPs' stance-- it was a result of their efforts to bulldoze a law through the system in spite of the majority crying foul.
First off, I'm not saying the recall process is bad, just in this case it is a waste. How did they bulldoze this through? They had to delay it due to the 14 Democrats running away to IL. The ones being recalled didn't bulldoze anything. At best you can argue that the Fitzgeralds did, but then you are saying that it's ok to blame everyone in the party for the actions of certain individuals.
I'd also love to see some evidence that the "majority is crying foul. The Supreme court race proved that the majority still support the conservative side.
I'd also love to see some evidence that the "majority is crying foul. The Supreme court race proved that the majority still support the conservative side.
Wow.
We should scrap local district elections because of the results of one state-wide race?
/boggle
MattDaddy wrote:I'd also love to see some evidence that the "majority is crying foul. The Supreme court race proved that the majority still support the conservative side.
Wow.
We should scrap local district elections because of the results of one state-wide race?
/boggle
Governor Tarkin: The Imperial Senate will no longer be of any concern to us. I have just received word from Coruscant that the Emperor has dissolved the council permanently. The last remnants of the Old Republic have been swept away forever.
General Tagge: But that's impossible! How will the Emperor maintain control without the bureaucracy?
Governor Tarkin: The regional governors now have direct control over their territories. Fear will keep the local systems in line. Fear of this battle station.
WipEout wrote:That the results of the GOP recalls were more clear-cut than those of the Democrat recalls doesn't really read as bias to me. Granted, I don't know the entire situation like the back of my hand, but from what I've read, the Democrats did not have out-of-state organizations trying to muscle their way into the state to affect the process. In my eyes, such evidence requires further scrutiny. It is not the Democrat's nor the GAB's fault that the Republicans didn't already have someone in the party ready to run for the election, especially knowing full well that the recalls were coming.
They still should have scheduled the recalls for the same day, even if some of them took longer to approve. I'm not sure what you mean about the Republicans didn't have someone ready to run for the election. The ones running in the election are currently elected officials busy working in Madison. They already knew who would be there, but the argument is that they did not have enough time to campaign compared to the Democrat challengers, who are not currently busy with being in Madison.
Sorry, I was unaware that the person being recalled could run for the same position in which they were, for all intents and purposes, being kicked out of. I guess the recall isn't exactly kicking that person out of that seat, then.
WipEout wrote:Even then, the recall wasn't a result of those GOPs' stance-- it was a result of their efforts to bulldoze a law through the system in spite of the majority crying foul.
First off, I'm not saying the recall process is bad, just in this case it is a waste. How did they bulldoze this through? They had to delay it due to the 14 Democrats running away to IL. The ones being recalled didn't bulldoze anything. At best you can argue that the Fitzgeralds did, but then you are saying that it's ok to blame everyone in the party for the actions of certain individuals.
But the Democrats skipped town solely to stop the process of bulldozing the anti-union thing through, did they not? Even during those protests and petitions and all that madness that was going on in and around Madison that was proof that the majority of the people (within their respective districts) did not agree with the bill that their GOP representatives were trying to pass. Whether Fitzgerald spear-headed the situation at that point or not, the GOP incumbents that were recalled decided on their own to A) support the bill, B) pass the bill illegally, and C) at best keep quite when other GOP members tried to enforce it, if not actively support such wrongful enforcement.
I'd also love to see some evidence that the "majority is crying foul. The Supreme court race proved that the majority still support the conservative side.
Doesn't it takes a majority to push a recall election ahead within a district? If so, there's your evidence right there. If it wasn't the majority within that district that signed the petition, then they would not have had enough signatures to recall. If those officials hadn't tried to push ahead the bill with which the majority of their respective districts disagreed, those people wouldn't have opted to remove those officials in the first place.
______________________________________________
EDIT TO ADD: Sorry to come back to Act 10, Dimmer. I'll leave it at that. It was my understanding that it was the catalyst for the current recall situations, so I felt it tied in a great deal with this thread.
Ah, I stand corrected. Even so, however, it didn't take a majority to petition for the recalls, it still took a majority to vote the incumbents out, so I guess my point kinda still holds water.
So then, out of curiosity, what was the percentage of signatures relative to the previous elections for the recall petition? I'm assuming more than 25%, but has a more exact number been presented? Or am I skimming now?
I think MattDaddy was just taking exception to WipEout's characterization of the recalls being the result of our state GOP bulldozing through 2011 Wisconsin Act 10 while the majority cried foul, and attempted to use the results of the Prosser / Kloppenburg election to show there is still strong support for conservative policies in Wisconsin.
That's correct. I guess it was too much to expect that I be treated with some respect and not be compared to Evil empires and baby burners.
Ah, I stand corrected. Even so, however, it didn't take a majority to petition for the recalls, it still took a majority to vote the incumbents out, so I guess my point kinda still holds water.
So then, out of curiosity, what was the percentage of signatures relative to the previous elections for the recall petition? I'm assuming more than 25%, but has a more exact number been presented? Or am I skimming now?
The incumbents haven't been voted out. Yesterday was just a day for democrat primaries. The people up for recall are currently still in their positions. Your point is leaking all over the place.
Edit: Dimmer already addressed the second paragraph in an earlier post.
WipEout wrote:Ah, I stand corrected. Even so, however, it didn't take a majority to petition for the recalls, it still took a majority to vote the incumbents out, so I guess my point kinda still holds water.
So then, out of curiosity, what was the percentage of signatures relative to the previous elections for the recall petition? I'm assuming more than 25%, but has a more exact number been presented? Or am I skimming now?
The incumbents haven't been voted out. Yesterday was just a day for democrat primaries. The people up for recall are currently still in their positions. Your point is leaking all over the place.
True. Cold medicine doesn't help me in P&C conversations, sorry for the confusion.
I also agree with WipEout that the legitimate recall elections (the ones with actual candidates) are an investment in the democratic process.
For the record, I'm fine with the recall expenditures, for both parties. That's part of the process.
Forcing primaries by running fake candidates, however, is entirely unethical.
Maybe the Democrats should start playing those games too. Who knows, they might even win with one of their ringers. The Republicans almost did. Then people would be given the choice of a Democrat, or a Democrat pretending to be a Republican. Win!
Well, the voters lose, because they're being tricked, but who cares what voters want? It's all about the party, man.
Maybe the Democrats should start playing those games too.
They already did back in 2010.
http://biggovernment.com/mtrackers/2011/06/07/the-lefts-hypocrisy-on-fake-candidates-in-wisconsin/
Pages