Wisconsin's Governor Walker and the possibility of a recall

Good news (hopefully)

Washington Post[/url]]I just got off the phone with the Waukesha county executive’s office, where an official assured me she won’t be involved in vote counting this time around.

“She has agreed to step aside and she has assigned duties to the deputy clerk,” Shawn Lundie, the chief of staff in the county executive’s office, tells me. “She will not be involved in the vote counting this evening.”

The problem, though, is that similar assurances were given a month ago, during the Wisconsin recall primaries on May 8th. But even though Nickolaus had recused herself, she surprised some observers when she was spotted in her office reviewing election returns, according to local reports.

I pressed the county executive’s chief of staff a bit further on what’s going to happen tonight. Lundie told me that she could very well be in the office, as is her right under Wisconsin law.

When I asked if there were any assurance that Nickolaus would not be involved in vote counting, Lundie replied: “The assurance is Kathy’s word that she has delegated responsibility.”

edit

not really worth it.

Edit

Dimmerswitch wrote:
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).

This is bad. Very, very, very bad. Crossing the streams, bad.

Edit: swept under the rug

More to the point, really good blog by Pat Rothfuss on the importance of talking politics in a world that shies away from it, specifically in reference to the Wisconsin recalls:
Of thee I sing

Looks like there was a bit of a kerfuffle. Glad folks were able to work it out.

Ulairi, if you've got something to say about Governor Walker (or the recall election) I'd love to hear it, and would ask folks to keep these threads open to polite dissent and opposing viewpoints.

Yeah, this thread has been amazing. You've done great work here, Dimmerswitch et al.

duckideva wrote:
Dimmerswitch wrote:
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).

This is bad. Very, very, very bad. Crossing the streams, bad.

Yeah, that story earlier this morning about Kathy agreeing to stay out of today's election seems to have been a tad premature. Also (apparently)wrong.

Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel[/url]]While Waukesha County Executive Dan Vrakas and his chief of staff insisted both Monday and Tuesday that County Clerk Kathy Nickolaus is not the one in charge of election duties this recall election, her actions say otherwise.

While Nickolaus has refused to respond to this reporter's questions in her office, turning her back and closing her office door while the reporter waited at a service counter, her deputy, Kelly Yaeger, hasn't responded, either.

Nickolaus has been observed passing out election supplies to local clerks leading up to Tuesday's election, and she's the one who's fielded questions Tuesday from the field, said Gina Kozlik, Waukesha's deputy clerk-treasurer.

Shawm Lundie, Vrakas' chief of staff, said he was confident procedures put in place with Yaeger will assure smooth reporting of votes Tuesday night. He also said Yaeger, while fully competent, is free to ask Nickolaus to assist her.

On Tuesday, Vrakas responded to complaints that Nickolaus was running the election: "It's absolutely not true. She agreed to step aside and hand off her duties to Kelly and that has occurred."

Meanwhile, an observer with the Democratic Party, Jordon Primakow, said Nickolaus has been cooperative as he sits in her reception area, where he arrived at 7:30 a.m. He plans to stay until votes are in.

"They've been helpful with me when I had questions," he said.

He called the morning fairly quiet, with scattered reports of problems relayed by Nickolaus to him, including a jammed machine in Oconomowoc that was quickly replaced.

He said only Nickolaus has approached him with updates, not Yaeger.

Just remember that Yaeger is responsible if Nickolaus fails.

IMAGE(http://media.giantbomb.com/uploads/7/74800/1412841-chuck_yeager_s_air_combat_large.gif)

When should polling numbers start creeping in?

Kamakazi010654 wrote:
When should polling numbers start creeping in?

Don't think we'll see anything substantive until after the polls close (at 8pm Central tonight).

All the turnout reports I've seen so far are that turnout is very high.

Prediction #1: there will be a recount!

Prediction #2: it won't change the original winner, but the losing side will forever feel like this election was stolen from them.

Seth wrote:
Prediction #1: there will be a recount!

Prediction #2: it won't change the original winner, but the losing side will forever feel like this election was stolen from them.

They're one state too far east for that.

LouZiffer wrote:
Just remember that Yaeger is responsible when Nickolaus fails.

Fixed that for you.

Wouldn't the resolute refusal to share important details of how an election is conducted run afoul of some kind of election transparency law somewhere?

I mean, if there's one thing this whole episode has shown me it's that the law is what you can get away with. But I presume that, were we inclined to such an academic exercise, we could put our fingers on a particular law ("I remember those!") which Kathy Nikolaus is brazenly disregarding by refusing to disclose whether she's in charge, correct?

The Waukesha County Executive's office has said she's not in charge.

The issue is that all the evidence from folks on-site points to that not being the case.

Since she is (still, unbelievably) the County Clerk for Waukesha County, I don't think there's any reasonable way to argue that her managing the election violates the law. A grave concern, sure - especially given what appears to be her gross incompetence, and close association with election irregularities. But not illegal.

Kamakazi010654 wrote:
When should polling numbers start creeping in?

IIRC Election law forbids reporting numbers until the polls have closed, to avoid influencing those who have not been able to cast a ballot yet.

NPR was saying that some precincts, without anything fishy going on, will have more than 100% turnout.

What's that, you say? Wisconsin voters can register at the polls, and apparently enough people are doing so that at least some municpalities are going to end up with more (valid!) votes cast than they had voters on the registration rolls, when they started this morning.

I hope they're peering over Nicklaus' shoulder, every minute.

DOJ is supposed to be monitoring the election. For what that's worth.

Associated Press results page, which will be updating as counties submit their data (after the polls close in ~45 minutes, of course).

I should probably also not that Wisconsin law requires that any prospective voters in line when the polls are normally scheduled to close must be allowed to vote. I'm seeing scattered reports of precincts running low/out of ballots & registration forms, so that may prove relevant as we head into the evening.

Dimmerswitch wrote:
Associated Press results page, which will be updating as counties submit their data (after the polls close in ~45 minutes, of course).

I should probably also not that Wisconsin law requires that any prospective voters in line when the polls are normally scheduled to close must be allowed to vote. I'm seeing scattered reports of precincts running low/out of ballots & registration forms, so that may prove relevant as we head into the evening.

at this point it's not even close; AP called it for Walker. 60% of the vote.

Dimmerswitch wrote:
Associated Press results page, which will be updating as counties submit their data (after the polls close in ~45 minutes, of course).

According to that page, with about 1/3rd of the precincts reporting Walker has 59%.

Malor wrote:
NPR was saying that some precincts, without anything fishy going on, will have more than 100% turnout.

What's that, you say? Wisconsin voters can register at the polls, and apparently enough people are doing so that at least some municpalities are going to end up with more (valid!) votes cast than they had voters on the registration rolls, when they started this morning.

I hope they're peering over Nicklaus' shoulder, every minute.


What, exactly, are you suggesting?

Also didn't Walker win by 5% in the first election?

Once again, money wins.

Kraint wrote:
Once again, money wins.

Aren't you essentially calling the citizens of Wisconsin stupid? Couldn't it be possible that they agree with what Walker is doing? It's incredibly smug that whenever any side loses they essentially insult the voters.

Ulairi wrote:
Kraint wrote:
Once again, money wins.

Aren't you essentially calling the citizens of Wisconsin stupid? Couldn't it be possible that they agree with what Walker is doing? It's incredibly smug that whenever any side loses they essentially insult the voters.

On average, the citizens of every state are ignorant and stupid.

Also, a lot of reports are saying Walker out spent Barret 30 MM to 4 MM, they forget to include any of the liberal (read union) money. Very disingenuous.

I don't think that's true, Ulairi.