The Bellwether? Amanda Paulson, for The Christian Science Monitor: Remember the Wisconsin recall efforts, in which angry voters on both sides of the aisle sought to punish state lawmakers for their roles in Gov. Scott Walker’s controversial move to end collective bargaining and other union rights? On Tuesday, voters in a handful of districts can finally weigh in on those lawmakers targeted in the recalls. It’s possible – but unlikely – that the elections could even change the power dynamic in the state Senate, if Democrats were to gain the three seats they need to take control. The recall elections will gauge the political pulse in a highly divided state that is likely to be a pivotal swing state in the 2012 presidential contest. “This is the first real electoral test of the staying power of the [collective bargaining] issue,” says Jeff Mayers, president of Wispolitics.com, a nonpartisan political website in Madison. “Does it have electoral legs – that’s what everyone is watching to see.” But don’t look for answers right away. Tuesday’s vote is just the first of four elections that will take place over the next month, in a complex series of primaries and general elections that is sending voters to the polls at an odd time of year. To understand it all, it helps to think of the votes not as recalls but as special elections, in which lawmakers are being forced to defend their seats ahead of schedule. The six Republican senators being challenged – by Democrats angry over their roles in Governor Walker’s legislation – would have had to face reelection Tuesday, but state Republicans helped buy them some more time by putting up Republican candidates as Democrats (“protest candidates," according to the GOP; "fake Democrats," according to the Democrats) so as to force a Democratic primary and buy GOP legislators another month. "If there weren't primaries in these races, our Republican senators would have had to face elections just days after voting on the state budget, essentially giving them no time to campaign," Stephan Thompson, executive director of the Wisconsin Republican Party, told Fox News. The actual general election will be held a month later, on Aug 9. Next Tuesday, meanwhile, three Democratic senators will have to defend themselves. They are among those who fled the state in a bid to prevent a vote on the governor's budget plan. Though Democrats haven’t put up protest candidates, two of those elections also have multiple GOP challengers, and so will hold a primary next week rather than a general election, and the general election will take place Aug. 16. Patricia Zengerle, for Reuters: Labor unions and their Republican opponents are pouring record amounts of cash into state ballot fights over workers' rights this year that could shape the political agenda in the 2012 election. The contests in Wisconsin and Ohio—both crucial "swing" states expected to be decided by slim margins when Democratic President Barack Obama runs for re-election next year—pit newly elected Republican governors and state legislators against traditionally Democratic labor groups. Both are seen as tests of union strength and Republican staying power after big Republican victories in 2010 state elections. The tens of millions of dollars being spent—much of it coming from outside the two states—are making them among the most expensive state votes ever. Wisconsin residents voted on Tuesday in a recall election on whether to oust six Republican state senators in what is seen as a referendum on Republican Governor Scott Walker's aggressive fight to cut back state workers collective bargaining rights. Two Democratic state senators face recall votes on August 16 and a third Democrat held his seat in one last month. If Republicans suffer a net loss of three seats, control of the state senate, which turned Republican in 2010, would shift back to the Democrats. Many will recall that Democratic supporters charged at the time that the GOP agenda was not actually about the state budget, but, rather, a wild swing at a traditional target of Republican policies. While Republicans were allegedly fretting about the state coffers, they gave away millions in tax breaks for corporations and wealthy individuals while attempting to force public employees to shoulder the burden through degradation of wages and working standards. A subtextual test in the Wisconsin and upcoming Ohio elections is whether or not the conservative blitz tactics seen in several states and most recently in the debt ceiling debate have any favorable impact with voters. Will the enigmatic swing bloc appreciate the all-or-nothing, make-my-day, the-teddy-bear's-gonna-get-it approach of the GOP and its supporters. This is the big test. Union strength and Republican staying power are marketplace outcomes. The principles at stake might seem a bit arcane, but if the Republicans prevail we can essentially expect another cycle of kamikaze politics from the right wing. If the Democrats prevail, the outcome is murkier, as while the GOP would have every reason to pull back from their hardline approach, there is no guarantee that they will. There is a lot at stake. Will Republicans die by this sword? Will they play it to the hilt? Will they prevail over the mighty, evil unions and continue to help America by putting people out of work? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Economic Policy Institute____________________ Notes: Paulson, Amanda. "Wisconsin recall elections begin, a legacy of Scott Walker's labor union wars". The Christian Science Monitor. July 12, 2011. CSMonitor.com. August 9, 2011. http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2011/0...n-a-legacy-of-Scott-Walker-s-labor-union-wars Zengerle, Patricia. "For unions, state votes may point way for 2012". Reuters. August 9, 2011. Reuters.com. August 9, 2011. http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/09/us-usa-campaign-labor-idUSTRE7785L120110809 Karimian, Arin. "Employment during the economic recovery". Economic Policy Institute. July 6, 2011. EPI.org. August 9, 2011. http://www.epi.org/economic_snapshots/entry/employment_during_the_recovery/
What in the world does that mean anyway. How can a Republican run as a Democrat? This seems very fishy to me seeing that you must choose a party to run with.:shrug:
Buying Time Without any primary challengers, the next step would have been the general recall. This would have been very soon after the Republican legislature pushed some very controversial bills. Obviously, the GOP is behind its candidates. And the Democrats were prepared with generally accepted candidates; there would be no primary challenges. The Republicans, then, had candidates sign on as Democrats, in order to force a primary. By doing so, they pushed the general recall date back a month, thus finding some time for the public temper to cool off a little, and also to find some tactical plan to get themselves through this. To say it was an "open secret" would be to overstate the matter. Everyone knew. In the Second District, the fake Democrat was Otto Junkermann, a Republican former county supervisor and state assemblyman. In the Thirty-Second, former county Republican executive committee member James D. Smith ran as a Democrat in order to force a primary. The whole thing was just a maneuver for time. ____________________ Notes: Bauer Scott. "Wisconsin Recall Elections: Six Fake Democrats Force Primaries In Recall Races". The Huffington Post. July 12, 2011. HuffingtonPost.com. August 9, 2011. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/12/wisconsin-recall-elections_n_895537.html
The recall elections drew many millions in outside money to these local races. One of the races, on the western border, may prove to have been the most expensive election per capita in US history. Most of the money went to backing Republican incumbents. Meanwhile, fans of electoral fraud who remember last year's judicial election scandal, with the Wisconsin election official in a key district taking the laptop with the official vote records home over night, and coming back a day later with thousands more votes for a Republican judge to decide a close race, can sit back with the popcorn: that same official is reporting from Waukesha that there will be a long and unexplained delay in reporting the vote totals again from that same district, in another very close and key race. That will be the third or fourth election this same official (Nichols) has been in the middle of events that indicate what is at best incompetence.
So what was , still remains. Looks like nothing changes and the Governor has got what he wanted from his voters. Now there's another vote, and I don't understand why it couldn't have been added to this election, next week to see if the two Democrats are going to be removed. That could change things as well.
Wonderful, a victory for big money! And the idiots are cheering it on! Yes, please take away our democracy, we want to be ruled by an economic royalty!
Was it a victory for Republicans? They lost two seats in the Senate. Loosing seats in staunch Republican districts does not sound like a victory to me.
I can't wait for Rick Perry, Jeb Bush, Sarah Palin, and Newt Gingrich to be fused into one four-headed body, and watch that creature run in 2012. I'm giddy just thinking about it.
Call it a slightly Republican leaning draw. In the end, they retained control of the Senate and there will be no chance--at least or another year--to alter the momentum of the Wisconsin state house. ~String
The GOP lost two seats. Didn't Perry's Walker's plan pass by only two votes? Shifting two votes would and things would have turned out differently. Still the shift at this point can probably not change things as there is most likely insufficient votes to over turn a veto... Unless the loss of two seats affe ts the votes of a few of the other Republicans. Edit.., I don't know what I was thinking.
Except the election wasn't decided by those vote records. There was an independently certified recount of that election and the Republican judge won. And in this election the Democrats are not asserting that she did anything improper. Arthur
Looking Forward Analysis: Nate Silver The one and only Nate Silver: Close doesn’t count in elections — just ask Al Gore or Norm Coleman. It appeared as late as midnight on Tuesday that Democrats had a chance to win the three seats necessary to give them control of Wisconsin’s State Senate in an unusual and expensive recall election. In the end, however, the Republican incumbent, Alberta Darling, surged passed the Democratic challenger, Sandy Pasch, as votes from suburban Milwaukee were counted. Democrats picked up two seats — but Republicans maintained a 17-to-16 majority. Where margins of victory do matter, however, is when you’re making inferences about future elections from the results .... .... One Republican incumbent, Robert Cowles, bettered Mr. Walker’s performance in his district, winning 60.4 percent of the vote as compared to the 57.4 percent that Mr. Walker achieved there in winning the governor’s race last November. The other five lagged Mr. Walker, some modestly and some significantly. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! via The New York Times In the wake of the vote, it seems many are confused by the results. Republican pundits point to winning four of six, and, hey, two out of three ain't bad. Democratic supporters feel hopeful for having won two, and comfort themselves in the losses by arguing that it was well done to even push the recall to a vote in those districts. But those looking for a measure of insight to the 2012 general aren't finding much. At the most, it seems that we can conclude that Republicans are comfortable with their platform, and Democrats continue to sense opportunity. Whether or not that opportunity is real, or as large as Democrats hope is an open question. Whether Republican success in sympathetic districts can carry over in wider contests is an open question. And these, really, touch the heart of the political situation. I asserted in the poll that the Wisconsin recall election is somewhat important in terms of 2012. To the other, unfortunately I cannot read the signs at this time, so it is difficult to figure in what way the outcome is however important. There are signs both hopeful and discouraging, but nothing clear was won on Tuesday. The Republicans certainly didn't lose, but it seems we can say the same about the Democrats. We can only wait and argue and see what the future brings. ____________________ Notes: Silver, Nate. "Wisc. Results Suggest Recall of Governor Would Be Close". FiveThirtyEight. August 10, 2011. FiveThirtyEight.Blogs.NYTimes.com. August 11, 2011. http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytime...ts-suggest-recall-of-governor-would-be-close/
Wisconsin lessons: - Republicans put everything into defending these seats including but not limited to 1) Dirty Tricks: attempting to delay and confuse voting by running staunch Republicans as Democrats. 2) Massive spending
Something more .... In other words, and even if we add the accusations of attempted voter suppression, nothing new here? Those aren't really lessons, are they? More like reminders of what we already know? I would like to think there's something more we can take away from this endeavor. ____________________ Notes: Lavender, Paige. "Americans For Prosperity Accused Of Voter Suppression In Wisconsin Recall Elections". The Huffington Post. August 3, 2011. HuffingtonPost.com. August 11, 2011. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/...or-prosperity-wisconsin-recalls_n_913561.html
For those seeking a little clarity: Republicans got 184,328 votes or 53% and Democrats got 164,129 or 47% of the vote. http://wisconsinvote.org/
LOL, yeah. Well they won't find clarity in your posts Arthur. Your numbers might be relevant if were talking about a statewide race or a national race. But that is not what is being discussed here. We are talking about six different races in six different geographical locations. Here are the points you forgot to mention in the aggregate numbers you provided. Democrats won 164,129 votes in districts gerrymandered by Republicans to give them the advantage. The aggregate vote difference (assuming no magical votes from that notorious county clerk) was only 20,199votes or a win by 6 percent. But as previously mentioned aggregates in these races are misleading. But it your best shot at putting lipstick on this pig. Now when you look at each of the individual races, there were two races that went strongly for Republicans. They won those two races by double digits (21 percent in one race and 15 percent in the other). In the remaining two races the margins for Republicans was much smaller, in the single digits. The bottom line here is that Republicans lost in Republican gerrymandered districts. And in two of the other districts the margin of victory (assuming no funny stuff) was quite small.
