Scott Walker recall takes an unexpected turn.

[Biggirl]

That lefty rag, The Nation has done an analysis on the signature collecting so far in Wisconsin's governor recall effort and has found that:

The first counties to approach their goals for the entire recall drive have been rural ones -- all of which send at least some Republicans to the legislature.

Indeed, a number of counties that backed Walker in 2010 are leading the pack when it comes to producing recall signatures.

In Columbia County, where Walker won 52 percent of the vote last year, more than 10,033 voters have signed recall petitions -- well over 45 percent of the total gubernatorial turnout of 2010.

In Pierce County, where Walker got 53 percent of the vote last year, more than 4,700 voters have signed recall petitions -- well over 25 percent of the total gubernatorial turnout of 2010.

In Oneida County, where Walker took 55 percent of the vote last year, almost 3,700 voters have signed recall petitions -- well over 20 percent of the total gubernatorial turnout of 2010.

.

The reason for this unexpectedly large rural response, according to The Nation:

Surveys of school administrators across the state show that the vast majority of the state’s school districts have had to make cuts, and are anticipating even deeper cuts, as a result of the governor’s policies. Communities in every corner of Wisconsin have been forced to open discussions about closing schools. Just last week, an advisory committee that has been meeting regularly since the summer to identify potential budgets cuts for the Sauk Prairie School District (north of Madison) voted to recommend that the school board close an elementary school.

Could it this be the beginning of the end of the Tea Party madness? Will they all now learn that cutting taxes and services will not signal the return of the 50's social values but instead lead to less money and less services? Or will all the Tea Partiers in every state have to live through less money and less services to understand exactly what that means?

[Mr. Moto]

Originally Posted by Biggirl

Could it this be the beginning of the end of the Tea Party madness? Will they all now learn that cutting taxes and services will not signal the return of the 50's social values but instead lead to less money and less services? Or will all the Tea Partiers in every state have to live through less money and less services to understand exactly what that means?

There is a soft economy right now. That means that spending has to be prioritized in government since revenue is down.

The vast majority of schools everywhere in the country have had to make cuts. Now, these have been deeper in certain places, and I think there are policy differences and local conditions that can account for this.

But your simpleheaded analysis doesn't account for any of this, and the Nation doesn't account for it either. It's just policies -> cuts -> signatures and maybe -> recall. I don't think it is nearly as simple as that.

[Typo Negative]

Maybe they want cuts but not on the stuff they like.....

[Euphonious Polemic]

Originally Posted by Mr. Moto

There is a soft economy right now. That means that spending has to be prioritized in government since revenue is down.

The vast majority of schools everywhere in the country have had to make cuts. Now, these have been deeper in certain places, and I think there are policy differences and local conditions that can account for this.

But your simpleheaded analysis doesn't account for any of this, and the Nation doesn't account for it either. It's just policies -> cuts -> signatures and maybe -> recall. I don't think it is nearly as simple as that.

Can you understand that more cuts to taxes = more cuts to services?

spooje has it right. It's all great to talk about cutting taxes, and cutting that "bloated government", and eliminating "waste", but when the rubber hits the road, actual services that people use will be eliminated. When the tax dollars decrease, people will find out that there is no fat to be cut - there is only meat and bone. And they won't like it.

[The Understander]

Originally Posted by Mr. Moto

There is a soft economy right now. That means that spending has to be prioritized in government since revenue is down.

The vast majority of schools everywhere in the country have had to make cuts. Now, these have been deeper in certain places, and I think there are policy differences and local conditions that can account for this.

But your simpleheaded analysis doesn't account for any of this, and the Nation doesn't account for it either. It's just policies -> cuts -> signatures and maybe -> recall. I don't think it is nearly as simple as that.

Why simpleheaded, Moto? Are you getting emotional because your man in Wisconsin is going down?

[Biggirl]

Originally Posted by Mr. Moto

But your simpleheaded analysis doesn't account for any of this, and the Nation doesn't account for it either. It's just policies -> cuts -> signatures and maybe -> recall. I don't think it is nearly as simple as that.

I see Mr. Moto is going with option B: not understanding what less money and less services actually mean.

[Icarus]

Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic

spooje has it right. It's all great to talk about cutting taxes, and cutting that "bloated government", and eliminating "waste", but when the rubber hits the road, actual services that people use will be eliminated. When the tax dollars decrease, people will find out that there is no fat to be cut - there is only meat and bone. And they won't like it.

I am always amused by politicians proclaiming "We need jobs!" and then a few moments later stating "We need to cut government!"

....um......so, which is it? Do they not understand that cutting government will mean laying off (government) workers?

[Voyager]

The people have been fed bull on the amount of government waste for so long that somewhere deep inside they must think that the government can give them all their services for no money. As an example, one of the nitwits who write into our paper about taxes being too high just wrote in to complain that he had to wait a whole hour at the DMV!

One small favor - can someone add to the petition a clause that the schmuck gets tarred and feathered after he is recalled? Thanks in advance.

[Jack Batty]

Originally Posted by Icarus

Do they not understand that cutting government will mean laying off (government) workers?

Government jobs aren't Jobs^TM. Jobs^TM can only be provided by millionai- ... I mean Job Creators^TM, who, of course, require tax rates near zero and every loophole available to create said Jobs^TM ... while also affording boarding school for Muffy and the spring trip to Gstaad for the little woman.

What are you, a communist or something?

[Ludovic]

Originally Posted by Icarus

I am always amused by politicians proclaiming "We need jobs!" and then a few moments later stating "We need to cut government!"

....um......so, which is it? Do they not understand that cutting government will mean laying off (government) workers?

Ironically, in the past couple of years there has been a pretty substantial increase in private employment. Unfortunately, it's been balanced, or more than balanced, by huge cuts in public employment on the state and local level.

Those who want to cut government spending should be proclaiming this as a huge success. They should own 9% unemployment. They should say "hey, I love 9% unemployment! It means we're cutting evil public sector employment!"

[Mr. Moto]

Originally Posted by Biggirl

I see Mr. Moto is going with option B: not understanding what less money and less services actually mean.

Oh, I understand pretty well. And for the record I think Walker could have obtained many of his stated goals in a less confrontational fashion. There was wide agreement that Wisconsin had to become more competitive with regard to their tax structure and their business environment.

[Damuri Ajashi]

Originally Posted by Voyager

The people have been fed bull on the amount of government waste for so long that somewhere deep inside they must think that the government can give them all their services for no money. As an example, one of the nitwits who write into our paper about taxes being too high just wrote in to complain that he had to wait a whole hour at the DMV!

I think its the notion that the folks working at the DMV are really no better than the guy who takes my order at McDonalds but we overpay them and therefore can afford fewer of them because evil government unions force taxpayers to overpay them and because their unions protect their jobs, they halfass it all day.

Basically they think government workers are bloodsuckers who provide little value for a lot of pay all at the taxpayer's expense.

[Damuri Ajashi]

Originally Posted by Ludovic

Ironically, in the past couple of years there has been a pretty substantial increase in private employment. Unfortunately, it's been balanced, or more than balanced, by huge cuts in public employment on the state and local level.

Cite?

[Voyager]

Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi

Cite?

Here is one. It does not say that government cuts are equal to industry growth, but it is clear that government cuts are hurting the recovery.

[Kolga]

There was a story on NPR this morning (sorry, no link, I heard it on the way to work) that about 44% of the jobs lost in the past month were government jobs.

It got me wondering if the people screaming about "cut the government!" realize that those lost jobs are now part of the unemployment rate that they're ALSO screaming about.

[Swords to Plowshares]

Originally Posted by Kolga

There was a story on NPR this morning (sorry, no link, I heard it on the way to work) that about 44% of the jobs lost in the past month were government jobs.

It got me wondering if the people screaming about "cut the government!" realize that those lost jobs are now part of the unemployment rate that they're ALSO screaming about.

Math isn't their strong suit.

[waterj2]

You might want to sit down for this shocking news, but there seem to be conservative dirty tricks afoot:

A group of self-identified conservatives say they plan to sabotage the effort to recall Wisconsin GOP Gov. Scott Walker, which begins on Tuesday, by burning and shredding recall petitions they've collected and misleading Wisconsinites about the recall process.

Nice of these people to discuss their plans on Facebook considering that:

Reid Magney, a spokesman from Wisconsin's Government Accountability Board, says destroying or defacing an official recall petition would violate state law. (Here's the relevant statute.) Such a violation, he adds, would be a class I felony in Wisconsin, which carries a maximum fine of $10,000 and up to three-and-a-half years in jail.

Oh, I'd be pretty amused to see these fools in jail.

[Esox Lucius]

Originally Posted by Ludovic

Ironically, in the past couple of years there has been a pretty substantial increase in private employment. Unfortunately, it's been balanced, or more than balanced, by huge cuts in public employment on the state and local level.

Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi

Cite?

This graph from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis shows federal gov't jobs declining and private sector jobs increasing in the last couple of years.

I found it through a Slate.com story entitled, "How America Ditched Socialism Under Barack Obama".

[Esox Lucius]

Originally Posted by Kolga

There was a story on NPR this morning (sorry, no link, I heard it on the way to work) that about 44% of the jobs lost in the past month were government jobs.

It got me wondering if the people screaming about "cut the government!" realize that those lost jobs are now part of the unemployment rate that they're ALSO screaming about.

They're right in that governments at every level have to cut spending. That's a fact that everyone's going to have to learn to live with. What the leaders have to decide is what cuts to make and how to do it that causes the least pain. It would be decent of the tea party types to accept that raising taxes would help to alleviate some of the pain which they will no doubt feel themselves.

[Kolga]

Originally Posted by Esox Lucius

They're right in that governments at every level have to cut spending. That's a fact that everyone's going to have to learn to live with.

That hasn't been proven to my satisfaction. What one person considers inappropriate government spending, another might consider essential services. Plus, the major government expenditures (such as the military budget) are NEVER on the table in the discussion of cutting government spending. Cutting small programs that help people seems to be the focus.

Originally Posted by Esox Lucius

It would be decent of the tea party types to accept that raising taxes would help to alleviate some of the pain which they will no doubt feel themselves.

On this point, we are in agreement.

[Damuri Ajashi]

Originally Posted by Esox Lucius

This graph from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis shows federal gov't jobs declining and private sector jobs increasing in the last couple of years.

I found it through a Slate.com story entitled, "How America Ditched Socialism Under Barack Obama".

Does that decline in public sector jobs in your graph include ALL government jobs or just federal jobs? It seems to me that the spike looks like census workers and ther following dcline looks like the slope of attrition we have seen at the federal level rather than the sort of layoffs we have had at the state level.

Originally Posted by Esox Lucius

They're right in that governments at every level have to cut spending. That's a fact that everyone's going to have to learn to live with. What the leaders have to decide is what cuts to make and how to do it that causes the least pain. It would be decent of the tea party types to accept that raising taxes would help to alleviate some of the pain which they will no doubt feel themselves.

I don't subscribe to the notion that every government dollar spent is about the same as every other dollar spent. I think government spending has priority over others and i believe that some spending is more of an investment in the future rather than consumption of government services today. I agree that raising some revenue would make some of the necessary cuts in health care spending hurt less than it would without any revenue increases.

[davidm]

Originally Posted by waterj2

You might want to sit down for this shocking news, but there seem to be conservative dirty tricks afoot:
Nice of these people to discuss their plans on Facebook considering that:Oh, I'd be pretty amused to see these fools in jail.

There's at least one in jail.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/regiona...135004083.html

"The suspect stood in line to sign a petition and when given the petition clipboard, he scribbled out some names on the actual form, and the recall worker took the clipboard back, and he left the scene without any incident," West Bend police Sgt. Matt Rohlinger said.
...
The man was being held in the Washington County Jail and will likely appear in court Monday, Rohlinger said.

They tracked the fool down by his license plate number.

[Zoe]

Many years ago our school had to go on a split session with high school in the morning and middle school in the afternoon. The building (even with portables) was way over-crowded.) We had SRO at the next PTSA meeting. There were a lot of angry working parents who missed the convenience of "babysitters" for their younger middle school children. The teachers suggested that maybe they should pay teachers babysitters' wages. That would have been a substantial raise for all of us.

Some areas are already bare bones in their schools. The teachers have been buying supplies for the school for a long time. The school buses have stopped running in some places. Not every sector of government needs to cut back the same amount. Some were cut to the quick long ago.

[Typo Knig]

I'm not from WI, but from what I heard Scott Walker campaigned on everything except a jihad on public employees. Walker then made that his signature issue from the moment he finished speaking his oath of office. Might the citizens of rural, formerly pro-Walker, counties be experiencing buyers' remorse over pretty much every issue raised in the campaign? What did Walker promise for rural counties? What he deliver - besides tying the state government in knots over a single issue that was never even discussed with voters?

[mkecane]

Today's the day for the recall signatures to be turned in. The necessary amount for a recall is 540k, the expected/hoped for amount by recall organizers was 700k, and the amount being reported that are actually being sent in is over one million. I'd like to think United Wisconsin and other organizers have kicked out all the Mickey Mouse signatures and that this is over 1m of authentic signatures.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepo...137489833.html

[Skammer]

Wow. That's beautiful.

[Snowboarder Bo]

AP story here. I'm stunned at how many signatures they've collected. The entire state population is only about 5.7 million people, so they collected nearly 1-in-5 residents signatures for this; assuming some will be tossed, it's still probably more than 1-in-6. For registered voters, the AP story says that it's close to 23% that signed the petitions.

My favorite lines from the AP story:

The massive number of signatures against Walker means his supporters would have to successfully challenge about 46 percent of them to stop an election.

"Doubtful" that they'll be able to successfully challenge that many signatures is an understatement, I'm sure.

If Walker is worried, he's not showing it: As petitions were delivered to election officials, Walker was out of state raising money to defend himself and the agenda that has made him a national conservative hero.

The governor has been raising money at a furious clip. He was hosting a $2,500 per-person fundraiser in New York City on Tuesday along with Maurice "Hank" Greenberg, the founder and former CEO of American International Group. AIG was one of the world's largest insurance companies but nearly collapsed in 2008 at the height of the financial crisis and received about $180 billion in bailout aid from the government.

Walker has also recently attended fundraisers in Texas, Kentucky and Tennessee. He is taking full advantage of both the conservative star persona he built as he put Wisconsin at the center of the national labor rights debate and a quirk in state law allowing those targeted for recall to ignore normal contribution limits until an election date is set.

As of mid-December, he had raised $5.1 million, with about half coming from out-of-state donors.

I doubt that he's going to convince many people to retain him, when what he's gonna be doing is telling them "Keep me governor; lots of rich people from other states like me being in charge here."

[SmellMyWort]

Now we just need a challenger.

[Damuri Ajashi]

Originally Posted by SmellMyWort

Now we just need a challenger.

What is Russ feingold up to these days?

[TransMonk]

Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi

What is Russ feingold up to these days?

Denying any interest in wanting to become Wisconsin's next governor, unfortunately.

[Damuri Ajashi]

Can't you just draft him?

[waterj2]

Just to put it in perspective, Walker got 1,128,941 votes when he was elected. So, yeah, a million signatures for a recall petition is a lot.

[Ibn Warraq]

Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi

What is Russ feingold up to these days?

Damuri Ajashi
Can't you just draft him?

Why would you want him to run for Governor?

He got beaten by a comfortable margin by a whacko Tea Party candidate who'd never held public office despite having all the advantages incumbency brings.

The Democrats asking him to run for Governor would be like the Republicans asking Rick Santorum to run for the Governor of Pennsylvania.

[Happy Lendervedder]

Problem with this whole thing is that even if Walker loses, he wins. If he gets bounced from office, it means he'll be able to get his Fox News gig, best-selling book, conservative sanctification and speechifying tour off the ground that much sooner. He'll be a multi-gazillionaire by the end of 2012. Boo-hoo, poor shamed politician.

There's really no reason for conservative politicians NOT to scorch the earth these days.

[davidm]

Yea, but at least he won't be influencing Wisconsin state policy anymore.

[Snowboarder Bo]

Aye, I don't think the point of the recall petition is to force him to suffer for the rest of his days, just to remove him from the legislative and administrative processes in Wisconsin.

ETA: Although I wouldn't want to bet against the notion that a lot of people who signed those petitions wouldn't be displeased if that happened.

[Happy Lendervedder]

No I understand that, but it does potentially encourage copycats.

[Typo Knig]

Originally Posted by Happy Lendervedder

No I understand that, but it does potentially encourage copycats.

Maybe he'll be happier as a wealthy commentator, like Mike Huckabee. We in VA are stuck with George Allen running for Senator again. He must not have been happy as a millionaire lawyer and consultant.

Back to WI, if Walker wants to stay in office he's got to arrange another incredible turn-around. This time a turn-around that's good for him.

[BobLibDem]

Originally Posted by Mr. Moto

There is a soft economy right now. That means that spending has to be prioritized in government since revenue is down.

I might, repeat might, have some sympathy for that statement if Walker hadn't intentionally created a budget crisis.

Start: Balanced state budget
Step 1: Lower taxes for wealthy and corporations
Step 2: Discover step 1 leads to deficit
Step 3: Blame deficit on public worker unions, demand cuts
Step 4: Get concessions from public workers, bust unions anyway
Step 5: Holy shit, this upsets people?

[Smapti]

Originally Posted by Ibn Warraq

Why would you want him to run for Governor?

He got beaten by a comfortable margin by a whacko Tea Party candidate who'd never held public office despite having all the advantages incumbency brings.

The Democrats asking him to run for Governor would be like the Republicans asking Rick Santorum to run for the Governor of Pennsylvania.

In a recall election, Feingold would be running against Walker, not against "a whacko Tea Party candidate".

[dropzone]

How about Herb Kohl? Senator is often a stepping stone to Governor, the position where the real money is. Um, as if he needs it.

[dropzone]

Originally Posted by Smapti

In a recall election, Feingold would be running against Walker, not against "a whacko Tea Party candidate".

There's a difference?

[alphaboi867]

How do they go about picking candidates to run against him? Do there need to be primaries, or does each party's state commitee get to pick a candidate? Or is this going to be like in California were anybody can get on the ballot absurdly easy & a few dozen people end up running?

[Happy Lendervedder]

There's going to be a Democratic primary.

[mkecane]

There will likely be a Democratic primary. Tom Barrett, who ran in 2010 and lost to Walker, may run again, and Kathleen Falk, former Dane County Executive, is thought to be a likely candidate.

Since all Walker has ever done as a small-government conservative is hold office in government and he doesn't have a degree (not that I'm saying he shouldn't be qualified for elected office due to said lack of degree), he won't be a lawyer. My guess is that he'd become a GOP lackey or Huckabee-type. If he loses, of course.

[Fear Itself]

Originally Posted by Mr. Moto

There is a soft economy right now. That means that spending has to be prioritized in government since revenue is down.

Why don't we raise revenue? America is not on a fixed income.

[Fear Itself]

Originally Posted by Ibn Warraq

Why would you want him to run for Governor?

Because it would drive the Teahadists batshit crazy. Next to Obama, isn't Feingold the most liberal something-something in the whole country?

[Damuri Ajashi]

Originally Posted by Ibn Warraq

Why would you want him to run for Governor?

He got beaten by a comfortable margin by a whacko Tea Party candidate who'd never held public office despite having all the advantages incumbency brings.

The Democrats asking him to run for Governor would be like the Republicans asking Rick Santorum to run for the Governor of Pennsylvania.

Because people haver gottena taste of what tea party policies translate into. they aren't cutting spending to reduce deficits (which is kinda what propelled them into office), they are cutting spending to cut taxes.

Originally Posted by Mr. Moto

There is a soft economy right now. That means that spending has to be prioritized in government since revenue is down.

And the priority seems to be tax cuts over schools.

[TransMonk]

Kathleen Falk officially tosses her hat into the Democratic challenger ring.

http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/loc...9bb2963f4.html

This announcement does not inspire me in the slightest.

[Onomatopoeia]

Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi

Can't you just draft him?

I just signed this petition to draft Feingold.