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.
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).
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.
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!
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.
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.
last I heard, polls were painting a pretty rosy picture for Walker and his cronies. Is that still true?
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.
Sometimes I think the middle class doesn't deserve to exist.
The price of freedom is eternal...sorry, gotta go. Hoarders is on.
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.
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.
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.
Pages