The Twin Cities’ lefty sorosphere is all atwitter over the latest results from the Wisconsin recall primaries (and one actual election).
Eric “Big” Pusey at Minnesota “Progressive” Project tweetched:
Eric Pusey – The results from the 1st round of recall elections in #WI are in http://ow.ly/5IX81 Doesn’t look good for teabaggers #1U #stribpol
What happened was that the Republicans who entered the Democrat primary races…got beaten. In Democrat primaries.
That’s not exactly Man Bites Dog. More like dog sniffs dog.
And the other big news – the one actual election – went…well, about as expected. From Kos:
Today, incumbent Democratic Senator Dave Hansen thoroughly crushed his Republican opponent in the first of the recall elections pitting a Democrat against a Republican. Hansen retains his seat and the FitzWalkerstan cult leaders in Madison are feeling the heat.
They’re “feeling the heat” over…the Dems holding a seat. In Green Bay – which isn’t much less Democrat than Saint Paul. By the same margin, or slightly less, than he won in 2008 (look up Senate District 30).
If this is the big tonic for the lefty troops the day after their defeat in Minnesota, it’s a pretty warm, weak one so far.
Steve Eggleston, a Milwaukee-based blogger that I trust, has noted that a better potential Republican candidate got knocked off the ballot because of petition challenges. The guy who ended up on the ballot was a bit of a gadfly, apparently.
Frankly, I don’t much care if any of the fleabaggers get beat or not — what I’d really like to see is all the incumbents prevail, regardless of party. That would be a sign to Democrats that people are tired of this crap.
The so-called Republican had a criminal record, and was out spent $318,000 to $2,000.
That is not a typo. The Democrat spent 159 times as much as the Republican.
Got a link on that spending figure, Chuck? This is just getting richer and richer.
Mitch, today’s St Paul Pioneer Press:
http://www.twincities.com/ci_18511020?IADID=Search-www.twincities.com-www.twincities.com
“Hansen entered his race with a major cash advantage, raising $318,000 since April, while VanderLeest raised $2,000. VanderLeest also could be vulnerable because of a criminal record that included convictions in 2006 on two misdemeanor counts of disorderly conduct.”
National unions are flooding Wisconsin with money. The default amount per race seems to be around $350,000 – $400,000. That is a boatload of money for a race that should not even be happening (a recall due to a vote and not misconduct).
Tsk tsk tsk. You’re too smart to so completely miss why this is a man bites dog story Mitch. So must mean you’re trying to divert the attention of WHY this is an important election development.
So, you have a sleazy attempt to misuse the Wisconsin election by the right, and you have a right wing candidate in an increasingly conservative district who can’t raise more than $2,000. Gee, could it be that the Republicans have become unpopular in Wisconsin – and by inference to the response to Republican policies, elsewhere as well? There are other indicators.
No, what made this a man bites dog story was the voter turnout in Wisconsin, which was unusual. I covered that here, citing the non-partisan not for profit Ballot News:
http://penigma.blogspot.com/2011/07/totals-recall.html
“Thus, turnout in the recall primaries far exceeded typical voter turnout. In the 8 primary elections held, a total of 206,014 votes were cast for turnout of 25.77 percent. The high turnout reflects the massive attention being given to the recalls. In typical special elections, voter turnout is lower than a general election. But here, voters are heading to the polls at higher levels than a normal election.”
” Unofficial vote totals show that turnout for the primaries ranged from a low of 10 percent for the Republican primary in District 22, up to 35.75 percent for the District 32 Democratic primary. Meanwhile, in the 30th District, the first recall between Dave Hansen and David VanderLeest had a total of 33,106 votes,[1] putting turnout at 37.14 percent. The 2008 general election in the same district had 78,176 votes.[2]”
It’s a little disingenuous of you to call this aiming low Mitch, when you are deliberately aiming away from the actual target altogether. Shame on you, trying to mislead your readers this way; it is perhaps the greatest indication of just how badly your political side is losing.
So, you have a sleazy attempt to misuse the Wisconsin election by the right, and you have a right wing candidate in an increasingly conservative district who can’t raise more than $2,000
Er, do you have any actual numbers on Republicans being ‘increasingly popular” in Green Bay? The Green Bay/Milwaukee metroplex is a lot like Minneapolis/Saint Paul, politically. “More popular” is a very relative thing. Going from 30% and 35% is a dramatic jump – but still doesn’t win the election.
And – FACT CHECK – from what I’ve heard, it was the candidate, not the party. He apparently had a prison record, among other problems.
Look, I totally get why you’d rather focus on this mismatch than on, say, Prosser, which was a dispositive statewide indicator of true state opinion.
CLOSED CIRCUIT TO CONSERVATIVES: DG said “sleazy attempt to misuse the Wisconsin election”.
That’s one of the left’s latest synonyms for “Republicans campaigning”.
The description of Hansen’s district, not the entire metro, was from Wisconsin media, including their local media. This may very well reflect a poor candidate in terms of not raising money; but to use this as the sole explanation ignores the other indicators, including numerous polls, and the low vote turn out for Republicans I cited. IF the Republicans had been energized to support the Republican policies in Wisconsin, I would have expected a better candidate to be put forward, and higher poll numbers, as well as more money to be raised, regardless of the canidate. You, Mitch, have railed often enough that all that was important was ideology… I believe on one occasion you asserted a chimp with the right ideology would be better than a liberal with the wrong ideology. Apparently that is not a shared view.
Interestingly enough, state wide, the amount of money being spent is similar – also per the site I quoted. A subsequent revision btw, to the stats, revised the Republican vote downwards. Multiple sources – you remember multi-sourcing? – all give emphasis to the marked difference in voter turn out. One of the things I hope to address later today was the number of signatures required for recall, and how that compared to the votes for recall candidates….right after I do some more on those affinity scam arraignments that finally occurred. So please don’t confuse my priority to that topic with me abandoning this one.
Dog Gone said:
“This may very well reflect a poor candidate”
Then said:
“IF the Republicans had been energized to support the Republican policies in Wisconsin”
Maybe they weren’t energized by a poor Republican candidate, and/or thought he would not support “Republican policies” (aka “fiscal sanity”).
Multiple sources can be processed to provide a consolidated viewpoint, but the accuracy of that viewpoint that relies heavily upon the “consolidator”. I don’t find you reliable, Dog Gone. At least not in that way. *shrug*