Wisconsin's Governor Walker and the possibility of a recall

So Walker created less than 400 jobs a month since he took office. At that pace he'll need to stay in office until 2054 to achieve his promise of creating 250,000 jobs.

Or, conversely, that the economy is getting better. Or both, for that matter.

Jolly Bill wrote:

The March 2012 job report for Wisconsin doesn't look good for Walker.

Christian Science Monitor wrote:

]Wisconsin lost 23,900 jobs between March 2011 and March 2012, according to data released Tuesday by the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. The state’s lead in job losses is significantly greater than the rest of the 50 states: No other state lost more than 3,500 jobs.

The majority of the losses in Wisconsin, 17,800, were in the public sector. However, the state lost more private-sector jobs, 6,100, than any other state. The only other states to report private-sector job losses in the same time period (instead of private-sector gains) were Mississippi and Rhode Island.

There are some interesting twists to the data that can be interpreted to support Walker. Such as unemployment being lower that a year ago in all but 3 counties of the state. This is a damaging report to have come out just as the recall is finally about to happen.

Milwaukee country is leading the state and one of the worst places in the country for employment. That isn't going to help the Mayor who is running.

Ulairi wrote:

Milwaukee county is leading the state and one of the worst places in the country for employment. That isn't going to help the Mayor who is running.

Nor the former County Executive currently occupying the Governor's mansion.

More seriously, I agree that's likely to be one of the two themes Walker runs on if he faces Barrett in the recall - the other, as mentioned previously, is "sore loser" (since Barrett lost to Walker in the 2010 election).

Dimmerswitch wrote:
Ulairi wrote:

Milwaukee county is leading the state and one of the worst places in the country for employment. That isn't going to help the Mayor who is running.

Nor the former County Executive currently occupying the Governor's mansion.

More seriously, I agree that's likely to be one of the two themes Walker runs on if he faces Barrett in the recall - the other, as mentioned previously, is "sore loser" (since Barrett lost to Walker in the 2010 election).

Walker is going to win the recall election no matter if Falk or Barrett win. I'm hoping it's Falk because she's aligned herself more with the unions than Barrett has and I think the state needs to have this issue out. The biggest winner I think will be Romney come November because instead of keeping their powder dry a lot of the unions and liberal groups are going all out again and if they lose they won't have the resources to help fund the Presidents campaign come November.

Ulairi wrote:

Walker is going to win the recall election no matter if Falk or Barrett win.

That's possible. Walker's certainly taken great advantage of the unlimited-fundraising window Wisconsin's recall laws provided, putting together a massive warchest - and the Democrats running against him are not without vulnerabilities (as I mentioned upthread).

I stand by my assessment from last summer.

Dimmerswitch, last August[/url]]

MattDaddy wrote:

Fair enough. Although I'm not sure how else to take that sentence.

The point I'd intended to make in my post comparing margins of victory in the recalls versus margins of victory in the Gubernatorial election was a rebuttal to the notion that this was a vindication of Walker's policies. I see an increasingly polarized electorate, with the middle slightly tending Democrat - though that still seems very fluid to me and may well change at any point (they may also end up tuning out of the political realm entirely, in large numbers). The Badger poll excerpt was to make the same point - namely, that the state as a whole doesn't appear as sold on Governor Walker's agenda as you seem to think.

With the Voter ID bill on hold (and potentially not settled before the recall election) I expect that we're going to see a significant portion of Walker's war chest be spent on "a pox on both their houses" messaging, trying to discourage people from thinking that who occupies the Governor's mansion makes any real difference.

Ulairi wrote:
Dimmerswitch wrote:
Ulairi wrote:

Milwaukee county is leading the state and one of the worst places in the country for employment. That isn't going to help the Mayor who is running.

Nor the former County Executive currently occupying the Governor's mansion.

More seriously, I agree that's likely to be one of the two themes Walker runs on if he faces Barrett in the recall - the other, as mentioned previously, is "sore loser" (since Barrett lost to Walker in the 2010 election).

Walker is going to win the recall election no matter if Falk or Barrett win. I'm hoping it's Falk because she's aligned herself more with the unions than Barrett has and I think the state needs to have this issue out. The biggest winner I think will be Romney come November because instead of keeping their powder dry a lot of the unions and liberal groups are going all out again and if they lose they won't have the resources to help fund the Presidents campaign come November.

Now that's a very interesting point/idea.

While complaining vociferously about out-of-state money, Governor Walker managed to outraise his four Democratic challengers combined by 670%, with only about a third of his money coming from Wisconsinites.

His stores of cash dwarf what his Democratic rivals have raised. But a report filed Monday showed an independent group supporting Democrat Kathleen Falk received $4.5 million, nearly all of it from unions and about a third of it from out of state.

Walker's fundraising is on par with that of second-tier presidential candidates. For instance, Rick Santorum raised $18.5 million between Jan. 1 and March 31, and Newt Gingrich raised a little less than $10 million during that period.

Walker has been able to raise so much because of the national appeal he developed with conservatives after his high-profile fight with labor unions and a quirk in Wisconsin law that allows unlimited fundraising while recalls are pending.

Conservative billionaire Diane Hendricks gave Walker $500,000. Hendricks co-founded Beloit-based ABC Supply, a roofing wholesaler and siding distributor, with her husband, Ken, who died in a 2007 fall.

Her donation was the single largest ever to a gubernatorial candidate in the state and tied the $500,000 given to Walker over recent months by Bob Perry, owner of Houston-based Perry Homes and a chief backer of the Swift Boat Veterans ads against Democrat John Kerry in the 2004 race for president.

"Wisconsin's never seen anything like this kind of money," said Jay Heck, executive director of Common Cause in Wisconsin. "This is all to persuade a relatively tiny universe of undecided voters. It'll be the highest cost per voter spent in the history of the nation in terms of the cost of persuading people."

Thanks, Citizens United!

Dimmerswitch wrote:

While complaining vociferously about out-of-state money, Governor Walker managed to outraise his four Democratic challengers combined by 670%, with only about a third of his money coming from Wisconsinites.

His stores of cash dwarf what his Democratic rivals have raised. But a report filed Monday showed an independent group supporting Democrat Kathleen Falk received $4.5 million, nearly all of it from unions and about a third of it from out of state.

Walker's fundraising is on par with that of second-tier presidential candidates. For instance, Rick Santorum raised $18.5 million between Jan. 1 and March 31, and Newt Gingrich raised a little less than $10 million during that period.

Walker has been able to raise so much because of the national appeal he developed with conservatives after his high-profile fight with labor unions and a quirk in Wisconsin law that allows unlimited fundraising while recalls are pending.

Conservative billionaire Diane Hendricks gave Walker $500,000. Hendricks co-founded Beloit-based ABC Supply, a roofing wholesaler and siding distributor, with her husband, Ken, who died in a 2007 fall.

Her donation was the single largest ever to a gubernatorial candidate in the state and tied the $500,000 given to Walker over recent months by Bob Perry, owner of Houston-based Perry Homes and a chief backer of the Swift Boat Veterans ads against Democrat John Kerry in the 2004 race for president.

"Wisconsin's never seen anything like this kind of money," said Jay Heck, executive director of Common Cause in Wisconsin. "This is all to persuade a relatively tiny universe of undecided voters. It'll be the highest cost per voter spent in the history of the nation in terms of the cost of persuading people."

Thanks, Citizens United!

His clever plan is to balance out the critical failure of his job-creation pledge by hiring lots of campaign staff and doubling the size of the WI advertising industry.

Probably no surprise that, as Wisconsin lags the rest of the nation in job creation, Governor Walker is walking back his pledge to create 250,000 jobs.

Walker unveiled his pledge to create 250,000 new jobs and 10,000 new businesses in February 2010, when he was a candidate for office. One of his GOP rivals called it "borderline ridiculous," but when Milwaukee broadcaster Mike Gousha asked, "Is this a campaign promise something you want to be held to?" Walker answered, "Absolutely."

Walker followed his pledge with a plan (PDF). It named "six things we must do to make Wisconsin economically competitive with other states": lower taxes, eliminate red tape, end frivolous lawsuits, improve education, make health care affordable, and invest in infrastructure.

The governor, backed by solid Republican majorities in the state Legislature, succeeded in enacting a raft of legislation in the first few months of 2011. Walker and his allies also had their way with the state's biennial budget, which took effect July 1.

Between February 2010 and May 3, 2012, Walker sent 59 tweets on his personal and official Twitter sites that mention his plan to add 250,000 new jobs. The last such reference was on Oct. 14, a week before the state Department of Revenue predicted a net gain of just 136,000 private-sector jobs between 2010 and 2014, suggesting Walker will fall well short of his goal.

The state Department of Workforce Development reported job losses in each of the last six months of the year; the numbers saw an uptick in January and February 2012, but fell again in March.

Since Walker took office, the state of Wisconsin has gained just 5,900 private-sector jobs.

Primary elections for our upcoming recalls were held yesterday. With all precincts reporting, here are the winners:

Governor (D): Tom Barrett
Governor (R): Scott Walker
Lt. Governor (D): Mahlon Mitchell
Lt. Governor (R): Rebecca Kleefisch (uncontested)
State Senate - District 13 (D): Lori Compas
State Senate - District 21 (D): John Lehman
State Senate - District 23 (D): Kristin Dexter

None of the State Senate Republican primaries were contested, since the Wisconsin Democratic Party refused to run fake candidates. Scott Walker faced opposition in the form of Arthur Kohl-Riggs, a young protestor who ran as a "Lincoln Republican", with no support from the Democratic Party.

All of the fake Democrats were defeated.

Phil Brinkman, city editor for the Wisconsin State Journal, did some interesting math last night. Based on fundraising, poll results so far, here's the expenditure / vote ratio for our gubernatorial candidates:

Tom Barrett: $2.44 / vote
Kathleen Falk: $4.75 / vote
Kathleen Vinehout: $0.18 / vote
Doug LaFollette: $6.65 / vote (almost all his own money)
Arthur Kohl-Riggs: $0.09 / vote
Scott Walker: $22.50 / vote

Darlene Wink (mentioned upthread: misconduct, charges, guilty plea) was scheduled to be sentenced in court tomorrow.

Today the prosecution and defense both petitioned to delay sentencing.

Politiscoop[/url]]Wink was scheduled to be in court tomorrow and sentenced for the crimes she committed while working for then County Executive Scott Walker. Wink held the position of director of constituent services for Scott Walker while he was county executive, and had earlier agreed to assist prosecutors in the corruption probe. Earlier this year, she pleaded guilty to two misdemeanor counts of doing campaign work while being paid by taxpayers as Walker’s aide.

Milwaukee County assistant district attorney Bruce Landgraf said the state had enough evidence to charge Wink with felonies, but chose to reduce the charges in exchange for her assistance in other cases related to the probe. Landgraf mentioned testimony regarding digital evidence that was destroyed, and testimony against another Walker aide, Tim Russell. Russell has been charged for embezzling money from a fundraiser, which was to go to wounded American Veterans. Governor Scott Walker was only disappointed when he learned Russell had been charged.

With the sentencing now put on hold, it appears something has taken a turn in the case, which could be that Wink has more to say, or prosecutors have come across additional evidence that Wink would have first-hand knowledge of.

I'll update with a link to a more mainstream media writeup once there is one.

Yeah, looks like they are keeping her on the hook. "Keep talking, and watch your sentence drop..."

Redacting this for now.

I heard a segment yesterday on NPR where they basically played both the Republican and Democratic spin on this recall election back to back. It was amazing seeing the filters this recall is being viewed through.

The Republicans were basically saying that Walker was only making "tough choices" to balance the budget and that the reason everyone was mad was because some people had to make sacrifices to keep the government solvent. They argued that if he's recalled every politician in the country will then be terrified of making any real decisions while in office because they're afraid some minority group will force them into a costly recall. Now, correct me if I'm wrong but the big hubbub that caused this recall was Walker trying to do away with collective bargaining for state employees. And I also seem to recall studies showing that this move really wouldn't save any money while actual waste was being left untouched.

The Democrats are, of course, making this sound like the political apocalypse if Walker isn't recalled. That Walker had stated he was going to "divide and conquer" once he took office has probably been quoted a hundred thousand times in the last week. They also say that if he's not recalled then politicans the nation over will view this as a license to do whatever they like because there are no consequences to going against the will of the people when passing legislation. Honestly, they were making it sound like if Walker held office that we'd be seeing scenes from the Road Warrior played out in Wisconsin in a matter of months. Wouldn't it have been easier, and a bit more truthful, to simply point out that he was being recalled because he wasn't governing how the people wanted him to and that the changes he was making were not, in fact, for the good of the state but rather for the good of a few interests only?

I've been watching this recall just because I'm astonished at the sheer volume of right-wing dollars being spent on it. Millions and millions of dollars to keep Walker in office. Frightening amounts of Koch dollars. Citizens United was the worst thing that has ever happened to this country; and this election is but a bellweather as to what's coming down the pike for November.

If the Right manages to eliminate unions, which they're trying to do in every single state where they are in power, then they will have locked up elections for the rest of my life. Without unions, there is no leftist organization that can raise money and compete with the Kochs and the other billionaires who hate taxes, America and poor people.

So, many people are watching this election to see how bad it's really going to be.

So, a state of the Wisconsin recall post is probably overdue. My life has been a little crazy, and I apologize for my tardiness. I also apologize for the massive wall of text which is incoming.... now.

In regards to why we're having recall elections:

Removal of collective bargaining is the lightning-rod issue in a lot of the media coverage. It's especially charged because the unions had already agreed to all the financial concessions Governor Walker claimed were needed. In fact, Governor Walker admitted that revoking the right to collective bargaining would produce no savings, during his testimony to Congress last year.

And that was just the opening salvo. Governor Walker's administration, aided by the Fitzgerald brothers, has consistently taken the most divisive and combative approach to legislation.

2011 Wisconsin Act 10 (the "collective bargaining" bill) was passed in violation of Wisconsin Law § 19.84, as insufficient notice was given. Specifically, notice went out after 4pm for a 6pm meeting. The statute is astoundingly clear and well-written:

Wisconsin Law[/url]]19.84 Public notice.
(3) Public notice of every meeting of a governmental body shall be given at least 24 hours prior to the commencement of such meeting unless for good cause such notice is impossible or impractical, in which case shorter notice may be given, but in no case may the notice be provided less than 2 hours in advance of the meeting.

Rather than simply re-pass the bill with appropriate notice, Governor Walker and the state legislature made the rather boggling argument that they weren't compelled to obey the law when passing legislation. More troublingly, they colluded with the state Supreme Court to get a ruling stating this to be the case.

Another lower-profile example: we had big fight over the mining bill this past year - AB 426 (first mentioned here), which was originally introduced without an author listed, but broadly suspected to have been written by the mining company Gogebic Taconite. It was a huge Republican legislative priority, and ostensibly was to be the key jobs effort during that legislative session. The gutted environmental protections (among other issues) meant the initial draft of the bill was defeated. Moderate Republican Senator Dale Schultz (remember him?) was working in committee on a compromise bill that would have gotten the votes to pass. Senate Majority Leader Fitzgerald's response? Disband the committee. This is par for the course - read about how the redistricting went down last year, the $800 million Governor Walker refused before even taking office, or any number of bitterly partisan, divisive shenanigans over the past 18 months.

Me, on February 19th, 2011[/url]]The reason I'm down on the capitol is that our brand-new Governor (who won with 52% of the vote) is acting in a manner more suitable to a petty tyrant than an elected official of a state I'm proud to call home.

Quick tour through the Dimmerswitch Predict-o-Matic:

March 15th, 2011[/url]]I expect many efforts in the next month or two geared to suppress voting - there will be much public hand-wringing by Walker's political allies about "vote fraud", and anti-voting laws voted through on the pretext that they will stop that (largely fictive) problem.

2011 Wisconsin Act 23. Spot on.

August 10th, 2011[/url]]I see an increasingly polarized electorate, with the middle slightly tending Democrat - though that still seems very fluid to me and may well change at any point (they may also end up tuning out of the political realm entirely, in large numbers).

Current reports are that GAB expects absentee ballots to be slightly higher than in the 2010 election, which also featured a full slate of offices for election. It'll be very interesting to see the turnout numbers, though by the time those are available to dig through for comparison, we'll probably already know the election outcome.

August 10th, 2011[/url]]I do think that, if the Democrats hold next week's seats, Senator Schultz is in a position to be a strong moderating influence on state GOP policy. I don't think we're likely to have a Jim Jeffords moment (though I'd be happy to be wrong), but I am cautiously optimistic that we'll see less aggressively partisan legislation passed in the near term.

Wrap up

I've acknowledged for a long time that this was going to be a tough fight. Walker took great advantage of the loophole in Wisconsin electoral law that allowed him a several-month window of completely unlimited fundraising. As noted earlier, while complaining vociferously about out-of-state money, Governor Walker managed to outraise his four Democratic challengers combined by 670%, with only about a third of his money coming from Wisconsinites. I don't think we'll see final numbers until well after election day, but it seems very likely that Barrett (and all Barrett-supporting PACs) will be outspent by Governor Walker's campaign - even without taking into account the Walker-supporting PACs.

I'm going to go out on a limb and make two more predictions:

* If Governor Walker wins the recall election, it will be taken by the American Right as total and complete vindication of the the policies his administration has pushed through (and the slash-and-burn strategy they've used in doing so).
* If Governor Walker loses the recall election, the American Right will claim that stricter Voter ID laws are needed, attempting to pass something more restrictive even than 2011 Wisconsin Act 23 (first mentioned here). The fallback position will be that Walker's policies were great, but with a (spurious, totally unfair) cloud of corruption hanging over his head, voters were frightened away - in short, blaming the messenger rather than the message.

last I heard, polls were painting a pretty rosy picture for Walker and his cronies. Is that still true?

But that's not all...

Of course, the John Doe case has been proceeding. More developments last week:


Walker's former county spokeswoman, Fran McLaughlin, was granted immunity as part of the investigation. She is the 13th individual to receive immunity in the case.

Records show McLaughlin was given immunity after she invoked her Fifth Amendment right not to answer questions to avoid self-incrimination. Her attorney, Michael A.I. Whitcomb, refused further comment.

Governor Walker stated that his legal defense fund would not be used to pay for the legal expenses of his aides or staff. What's really interesting about this is that the Walker campaign still claims that he is not a target of the John Doe investigation. That's a bit of a problem, since Wisconsin law only allows politicians to establish legal defense funds if they're being investigated or charged.

Wisconsin Law, §11.64(1)[/url]]Any candidate or public official who is being investigated for, charged with or convicted of a criminal violation of this chapter or ch. 12, or whose agent is so investigated, charged or convicted, may establish a defense fund for expenditures supporting or defending the candidate or agent, or any dependent of the candidate or agent, while that person is being investigated for, or while the person is charged with or convicted of a criminal violation of this chapter or ch. 12.

If Walker has a legal defense fund, and it's not going to pay for the defense of any of his agents, I'm not sure how many more options there are for where that money gets spent.


Additionally, a document was leaked to the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, indicating that the John Doe investigation began after Walker's office began stonewalling the District Attorney's office. This puts the lie to Governor Walker's claim that he's the one who asked for the John Doe investigation.

On May 5, 2010, Assistant District Attorney Bruce Landgraf filed a petition with court officials asking if his office could initiate a secret investigation into what happened with $11,000 in donations intended for Operation Freedom, an annual event honoring veterans.

By making it a secret John Doe investigation, Landgraf wrote that prosecutors might get better cooperation from Walker's office, which had been "unwilling or unable" to turn over records and information needed in the investigation. He said he would need to subpoena county records and officials.

"It may be the County Executive's Office is reluctant to provide information to investigators due to a fear of political embarrassment," Landgraf wrote, noting that Walker was then running for governor.

The GOP was up in arms, claiming that this leak must have come from the DA's office, and was proof the John Doe investigation was politically-driven.

Today it was revealed that the source of the leak was Tim Russell, Scott Walker's Deputy Chief of Staff.

[Presiding Judge] Hansher began talking about the document that had somehow gotten into the hands of Daniel Bice. "In chambers," the judge said, "Mr. Krueger admitted that he had given the material to Mr. Bice and that he had done so with his client's consent. Is that true?"

"Yes," said Dennis Krueger.

That got heads snapping to attention. Tim Russell's lawyer — and, therefore, Tim Russell — had made public damaging information about Scott Walker and undermined the whole ethical basis of the governor's response to charges that he had misused his public office for private gain. It is not unreasonable to assume that this either was a warning shot — take care of me or you're going down, too — or evidence that Russell already has rolled. (Sources close to the case say that Russell already has given the prosecutors some information, but that it was more in the realm of confirmation of knowledge that the prosecutors already had obtained from other cooperating witnesses.) In either case, the John Doe investigation — and the attendant case of Tim Russell — has gone spiraling into hyperdrive. It may not materially affect the election either way, but, no matter what happens on Tuesday, Scott Walker is going to wake up Wednesday feeling just a little bit like Lon Robinson.

As he and Russell quick-stepped down the hall, one step ahead of the cameras, attorney Krueger kept saying, over and again, that "This was a public document. It was open to anyone who wanted to see it." Which does not explain why Krueger found it necessary to slip it to the one reporter whose work has so bedeviled the Walker campaign, and on morning of a debate between the governor and his opponent. The hall fell silent again.

Seth wrote:

last I heard, polls were painting a pretty rosy picture for Walker and his cronies. Is that still true?

The polls I'd seen had Walker up by 7-10 points until this past week. All polls are now within the margin of error, though I think the consensus is Walker's up by about 2 points. Turnout is likely to tell the tale.

To the extent that independents and undecideds are breaking towards Barrett, I think that the John Doe investigation is playing a role - though Barrett's performance in their second debate was also quite good.

(The "money" line is at the end, but the rest sets context. Walker's been attempting to deflect the John Doe attention by implying that Barrett is having his police force cook the books to underreport crime rates)

So, as usual, I'm confused with the politics at play here when it comes to ads... Not that it matters at this point for this particular election but in general....

Why didn't democrats simply do something to describe the bad things Walker has done like Dimmerswitch so clearly describes above (nice explanations by the way!)? It seems like the clear truth is a much more effective weapon than anything else.

Is this because the American people are really too dumb to think for themselves and giving them information is like talking to a dog? Sensationalism seems to be the only approach anymore....

Keep in mind, JC, that this thread has no opposing voice. This isn't meant to be "one side is as bad as another" discussion, but without Mattdaddy's point of view we're not getting an accurate representation of what the media blitz is like in Wisconsin. Plus I don't think one can discount the visceral, venemous, vitriolic loathing a healthy portion of Wisconsinites - and 21st century Americans in general - feel toward Unions. They almost regard Walker as a hero. That "Union" and "thug" are interchangeable to these people is very telling.

Sometimes I think the middle class doesn't deserve to exist.

Seth wrote:

Sometimes I think the middle class doesn't deserve to exist.

The price of freedom is eternal...sorry, gotta go. Hoarders is on.

Seth wrote:

Keep in mind, JC, that this thread has no opposing voice. This isn't meant to be "one side is as bad as another" discussion, but without Mattdaddy's point of view we're not getting an accurate representation of what the media blitz is like in Wisconsin.

I think I bend over backwards to give an accurate and fair representation of what's going on, citing sources whenever possible so interested folks can evaluate the data in context, but I agree that there is value in folks on different sides of an issue being able to (politely) argue their respective positions - I have in fact told MattDaddy this.

Back to the topic at hand, I've seen scattered reports of folks who signed the recall petition getting phone calls telling them "If you signed the recall petition, your job is done and you don't need to vote on Tuesday."

Obviously, every election there are stories reported which end up being spurious or factually incorrect - so take this with salt as-needed, but please also remember that the reports of robocalls targeting Democrats during the state senate recalls, telling them to vote absentee (after the deadline for absentee ballots was expired), was true.

My comments were in no way meant to sully your efforts here at accurate and honest reporting, even down to the fact that you're honest with your own bias. My only reservation and is you almost perfectly match *my* confirmation bias; that means I hesitate to truly and honestly say everyone feels the way we do...I mean what you're saying is perfectly valid and legit through my tinted glasses, but I hesitate to speak for everyone.

My apologies if you took my post as defaming your impeccable reporting.

Oh lord. Nobody in Waukesha is willing to answer who's running today's elections, but it looks like it may be Kathy Nickolaus (here's why that's a concern, for anyone who's interested).

Local Fox affiliate report:

Waukesha County Executive Vrakas said he was "unavailable" for comment, and Nickolaus refused repeated requests to clarify her role.

Seth wrote:

My comments were in no way meant to sully your efforts here at accurate and honest reporting, even down to the fact that you're honest with your own bias. My only reservation and is you almost perfectly match *my* confirmation bias; that means I hesitate to truly and honestly say everyone feels the way we do...I mean what you're saying is perfectly valid and legit through my tinted glasses, but I hesitate to speak for everyone.

My apologies if you took my post as defaming your impeccable reporting.

Didn't take it that way at all, but did want to stress that I've made a practice of constructively engaging with dissenting opinions throughout this process, and to try to keep the various Wisconsin threads open and supportive of dissenting opinions and reasonable debate.

My question was mostly rhetorical... Regardless of which "side" someone is on, it seems like no one is interested in illustrating or telling the truth anymore in politics.

It's not longer "President Obama is responsible for a 500 million tax payer dollar loan that went bad with Solyndra"

It's "Obama, born outside of the United States, is burning all your money in the socialist furnace of terrorism"

Using the Walker example above from Dimmerswitch I don't understand why the ads aren't simply stating the facts. Instead they couch them in hyperbole and exaggeration to the point where there is no truth to them anymore.

JC wrote:

My question was mostly rhetorical... Regardless of which "side" someone is on, it seems like no one is interested in illustrating or telling the truth anymore in politics.

Dimmerswitch is!

There are some out there. We need to continue to share the information about who is doing so, and not focus on how bad the majority of outlets are. Focus on the positive, SOME outlets continue to cover the facts well.

I'd be interested in seeing some of those ads you're referring to, JC. I haven't been impressed by the state-level Democratic party throughout the past 18 months, and I wouldn't be surprised if they'd put out at least a couple that went for cheap hyperbole rather than simply and factually laying out the case for recall - but I haven't seen *any* Barrett ads this election cycle, hyperbolic or otherwise.

Contrast that with the fact that Walker has so completely saturated the Wisconsin media market that nearly 50% of the ads even on the local progressive talk radio have been Walker (or pro-Walker PAC) advertisements. I can't imagine that's a really efficient use of his out-of-state donor money, but it definitely speaks to how the large financial advantage is allowing Governor Walker to effectively own the airwaves as we headed into today's vote.