Unions under Attack...

[GwynnInTheHall]

another reason to get the money out of politics.

USA for sale to the Highest bidder, to think otherwise is to be willfully ignorant.

[Bernie Brewer]

Sorry, Bernie, but you were so far off on the funding of the previous recall races* that I'm not prepared to accept your numbers for now.

*(Claim regarding union expenditures.)

Lucky, I never corrected myself because I thought Chance did an adequate job explaining how I got confused.

Hey Chance, you are better than me at this stuff, if you can find it, could please link the chart that was posted on the JSOnline website few days ago that will support most of the estimated $80MM. I think it will cover about $63MM and the remainder was estimated as additional spending that cannot be easily tracked because it didn't fall under campaign finance disclosure rules is estimated at $7.5MM to $20MM. It was an online drop down box and map that showed the amount of funding and where it came from for the various election related groups and candidates. And, I'll admit I am probably off in some of my numbers, but I wasn't intending on stating these as fact. My point was intended to be that campaign finance needs reform as does Wisconsin's recall laws.

[Judge Jude]

"I think Walker will be emboldened by the turnout, rather than be more cautious."

I would be fascinated to read a story about a politician of any stripe in human history who became more cautious and less emboldened after a 10-pt win.

Heck, politicians claim a "mandate" when they win by 3 pts!

Meanwhile, I think the left did well in North Jersey in a rare showdown of longtime incumbents in the same Democratic House of Reps primary.
Longtime Paterson Mayor Bill Pascrell trounced one-time Englewood Steve Rothman in a liberal vs liberal battle.

The backstory was that in redistricting, it seemed that Rothman was destined to take on Tea Party star Scott Garrett. But Rothman moved so that he could instead take on 75-yr-old Pascrell - a fatal mistake.

Some wags take the result as as sign that diehards on the left both were annoyed by Rothman's maneuvering and outraged that he didn't take on - and possibly knock out - Garrett.

Pascrell also had a better ground game, though, and that's part of the answer as well.

[Erik]

Some wags take the result as as sign that diehards on the left both were annoyed by Rothman's maneuvering and outraged that he didn't take on - and possibly knock out - Garrett.

He would have gotten creamed by Garrett.

[Judge Jude]

Well, the theory is somewhat of a visceral response from the left: dammit, get in there and fight that guy!

I haven't looked closely enough at the new map to say if Rothman had a chance.
But previously, the district had a lot of Dem towns, just lacked the organization.

[nots]

"I think Walker will be emboldened by the turnout, rather than be more cautious."

I would be fascinated to read a story about a politician of any stripe in human history who became more cautious and less emboldened after a 10-pt win.

Heck, politicians claim a "mandate" when they win by 3 pts!

Meanwhile, I think the left did well in North Jersey in a rare showdown of longtime incumbents in the same Democratic House of Reps primary.
Longtime Paterson Mayor Bill Pascrell trounced one-time Englewood Steve Rothman in a liberal vs liberal battle.

The backstory was that in redistricting, it seemed that Rothman was destined to take on Tea Party star Scott Garrett. But Rothman moved so that he could instead take on 75-yr-old Pascrell - a fatal mistake.

Some wags take the result as as sign that diehards on the left both were annoyed by Rothman's maneuvering and outraged that he didn't take on - and possibly knock out - Garrett.

Pascrell also had a better ground game, though, and that's part of the answer as well.

Pascrell was supported heavily by Bill Clinton and Rothman was an Obama guy, correct?

[nots]

In addition to the spending advantage, I think many of the voters weren't in love with the recall itself on principle. Exit polls showed that Obama would have won over Romney by about 7 points among the voters yesterday. I think that high a % of Walker/Obama voters had to be due in large part to the dissatisfaction with the Unions pushing this recall in the first place. A lot of folks (myself included) believe a recall should only be used when their are charges of corruption, not because of the way one party is governing.
The irony will be if the current scandal leads to corruption charges against Walker, which is certainly within the realm of possibility.

[Bob Kohm]

Right? But having balls never seems to take precedent over political expediency. Lame.

Hmm, easy answer but not really the most correct one. Do you think that any elected in an Executive office is likely to support the notion of a recall election in the first place? Do you think that after having witnessed the attempted ideological coup perpetrated against the Clinton Admin a sitting US President is likely to support a re-run of that based not on corruption or malfeasance but on ideological grounds? I don't. While it was politically expedient to keep this whole misguided adventure at arm's length, it was, I suspect, more important to Obama himself (if not his political team) to stay away from this thing because it was simply the right thing to do from the standpoint of his beliefs and experience.

[Lucky]

In addition to the spending advantage, I think many of the voters weren't in love with the recall itself on principle. Exit polls showed that Obama would have won over Romney by about 7 points among the voters yesterday. I think that high a % of Walker/Obama voters had to be due in large part to the dissatisfaction with the Unions pushing this recall in the first place. A lot of folks (myself included) believe a recall should only be used when their are charges of corruption, not because of the way one party is governing.
The irony will be if the current scandal leads to corruption charges against Walker, which is certainly within the realm of possibility.

I think this is a very good point (although I don't think the Unions were alone in pushing this recall). There were probably a significant number of people who agree that, absent impeachable crimes, the regular election cycle is the way to express satisfaction or dissatisfaction with a candidate.

[Judge Jude]

Who else was pushing the recall?

Yes, Rothman became one of the first House members in the US to back Obama back in 2007. So Clinton was in town last weekend campaigning for Pascrell (although Clinton's influence on elections is spotty).

Forgot to mention that Pascrell faces an entertaining, if lopsided, battle in the fall against Republican candidate Shmuly Boteach, the celebrity rabbi who was buddies with Michael Jackson!

[Lucky]

Who else was pushing the recall?

Yes, Rothman became one of the first House members in the US to back Obama back in 2007. So Clinton was in town last weekend campaigning for Pascrell (although Clinton's influence on elections is spotty).

Forgot to mention that Pascrell faces an entertaining, if lopsided, battle in the fall against Republican candidate Shmuly Boteach, the celebrity rabbi who was buddies with Michael Jackson!

Firefighters, teachers, other government employees, legislators, and many citizens who felt that Walker had acted in an underhanded manner to the detriment of the state, to name a few. And yes, I know that the firefighters and teachers are union members, but as you well know, the far right likes to distinguish between the good, hard-working citizens and the evil, power-hungry unions which represent them.

[B-Fly]

Walker wins it, and the spin is how clever Obama was never once to campaign for the Democratic candidate in Wisconsin while claiming his devotion to the union cause from afar, so he can try to minimize this on his own resume come November.

#changeyoucanbelievein
#sigh

I would think you, of all people, Judge Jude, wouldn't have supported the attempt to 'recall' a governor of any party outside of the regular election cycle. Maybe the President stayed out of this because he feels kind of like I do. When the people elect someone for a set term of years, the time for the electorate to determine whether or not you should continue in your job is at the end of that set term of years, unless you've done something impeachable, which Walker hasn't.

[Judge Jude]

Yeah, you and Bob make a very good point.
I'm not a fan of recalls, and much as I want Obama to be a "new kind of politician," to be fair I'm not sure what I can ask him to do - tell the unions not to vote for a recall out of principle?

#nevermind

[B-Fly]

Right? But having balls never seems to take precedent over political expediency. Lame.

Recall elections are absurd contrivances, IMO. Look at how much money got wasted on this when the referendum on Walker's performance should have been at the next scheduled election. If you vote someone in, you should live with him for the duration of his term unless he commits an impeachable offense. I don't get this slamming of the President for "political expediency". There's little doubt in my mind he'd have strongly supported a Democrat over Walker in the next real election. Once you start a trend of "recalling" elected officials for their politics during the course of their term, it's going to snowball the way filibustering snowballed and it will further crap up American politics. The worst thing about American politics is that from the moment an official gets elected he needs to start worrying about the next election. You think establishing a trend where one of this country's two warring parties can always try to fire up their base for a recall election whenever the other party acts boldly is ultimately a good idea for progressives?! Please. It's madness. I hope the whole idea of recall elections goes away as fast as humanly possible.

[Judge Jude]

Usually I like agreeing with B-Fly, but now he's just embarrassing me.
#pilingon