The battle for Wisconsin- WI needs all of you!

Jason P

mikepegg44 wrote:

Jason P wrote:

thoughts?

:corn:

excited to see that a lot of the people who voted for Walker will probably still support the president in NOV. while i am not excited at the prospect of Obama winning WI anymore than the next conservative, it helps forward the idea that people can vote without blind loyalty to a party. i am also glad it is over...there was so much spill over of negative campaign adds against walker here in Minneapolis it was sickening...

My main thought is that you should not be able to recall someone who gets elected and then does what he said he was going to do while campaigning. That is what the original election was for.

Secondary thoughts:

* This must have been a spur for the state-wide economy considering how much money was pumped into campaigning.

* This was a double-or-nothing bet by the unions ... and now they have to take the bus home from Vegas.

* I have no idea how this affects November.

* cheese curds = goodness

cincybearcat

Jason P wrote:

My main thought is that you should not be able to recall someone who gets elected and then does what he said he was going to do while campaigning. That is what the original election was for.

I agree. It was ridiculous.

Johnny Abruzzo

cincybearcat wrote:

Jason P wrote:

My main thought is that you should not be able to recall someone who gets elected and then does what he said he was going to do while campaigning. That is what the original election was for.

I agree. It was ridiculous.

I also agree. I think a lot of people maybe didn't prefer Walker but voted for him just as an opposition to the recall. Or maybe just some people.

MayDay10

Johnny Abruzzo wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

Jason P wrote:

My main thought is that you should not be able to recall someone who gets elected and then does what he said he was going to do while campaigning. That is what the original election was for.

I agree. It was ridiculous.

I also agree. I think a lot of people maybe didn't prefer Walker but voted for him just as an opposition to the recall. Or maybe just some people.

I saw somewhere that an exit poll showed that something like 15% of the people who voted for him were in this category

peacefrompaul

Johnny Abruzzo wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

Jason P wrote:

My main thought is that you should not be able to recall someone who gets elected and then does what he said he was going to do while campaigning. That is what the original election was for.

I agree. It was ridiculous.

I also agree. I think a lot of people maybe didn't prefer Walker but voted for him just as an opposition to the recall. Or maybe just some people.

I did, that's the primary reason for my vote. Not much of a fan of unions myself either but it wasn't my number one priority. Taking power from the unions isn't illegal... Plus, Milwaukee schools suck and the city is in the top ten for unemployment. Walker AND Barrett can kiss my ass

Johnny Abruzzo

peacefrompaul wrote:

Walker AND Barrett can kiss my ass

Yeah I guess the other problem was that the Democrats really didn't come up with an attractive candidate.

peacefrompaul

Johnny Abruzzo wrote:

peacefrompaul wrote:

Walker AND Barrett can kiss my ass

Yeah I guess the other problem was that the Democrats really didn't come up with an attractive candidate.

They picked the guy that lost to Walker two years ago...

EdsonNascimento

peacefrompaul wrote:

They picked the guy that lost to Walker two years ago...

And who lost BY MORE than the first time.

One clear message from this to all parties: folks know cutting spending is the only way we are getting out of this mess. You cannot spend your way out of recession.

Everything else is spin one way or the other.

peacefrompaul

EdsonNascimento wrote:

peacefrompaul wrote:

They picked the guy that lost to Walker two years ago...

And who lost BY MORE than the first time.

One clear message from this to all parties: folks know cutting spending is the only way we are getting out of this mess. You cannot spend your way out of recession.

Everything else is spin one way or the other.

You can't spend your way out of it
...

You also can't print your way out of it

Go Beavers

EdsonNascimento wrote:

One clear message from this to all parties: folks know cutting spending is the only way we are getting out of this mess. You cannot spend your way out of recession.

This is actually spin. The clear message from the Wisconsin recall was that the voters of Wisconsin didn't like the idea of a recall in this situation and that it didn't warrant it.

unsung

peacefrompaul wrote:

You can't spend your way out of it
...

You also can't print your way out of it

They sure seem to want to prove you wrong and are more than willing to bankrupt us and destroy the dollar doing it.

Go Beavers

unsung wrote:

peacefrompaul wrote:

You can't spend your way out of it
...

You also can't print your way out of it

They sure seem to want to prove you wrong and are more than willing to bankrupt us and destroy the dollar doing it.

Wisconsin prints money?

peacefrompaul

Go Beavers wrote:

unsung wrote:

peacefrompaul wrote:

You can't spend your way out of it
...

You also can't print your way out of it

They sure seem to want to prove you wrong and are more than willing to bankrupt us and destroy the dollar doing it.

Wisconsin prints money?

No, but they do right next door in Minnesota. Pretty off topic I guess, but just making a point about the debt crisis.

Jason P

Go Beavers wrote:

EdsonNascimento wrote:

One clear message from this to all parties: folks know cutting spending is the only way we are getting out of this mess. You cannot spend your way out of recession.

This is actually spin. The clear message from the Wisconsin recall was that the voters of Wisconsin didn't like the idea of a recall in this situation and that it didn't warrant it.

If Walker was recalled, would the clear message have been that the voters of Wisconsin really like recalls?

Go Beavers

Jason P wrote:

Go Beavers wrote:

EdsonNascimento wrote:

One clear message from this to all parties: folks know cutting spending is the only way we are getting out of this mess. You cannot spend your way out of recession.

This is actually spin. The clear message from the Wisconsin recall was that the voters of Wisconsin didn't like the idea of a recall in this situation and that it didn't warrant it.

If Walker was recalled, would the clear message have been that the voters of Wisconsin really like recalls?

I would mean that enough felt a recall was appropriate in this situation.

EdsonNascimento

Go Beavers wrote:

EdsonNascimento wrote:

One clear message from this to all parties: folks know cutting spending is the only way we are getting out of this mess. You cannot spend your way out of recession.

This is actually spin. The clear message from the Wisconsin recall was that the voters of Wisconsin didn't like the idea of a recall in this situation and that it didn't warrant it.

Ummm. No. There was 1 thing the recall was about: Reduced Spending by cutting off the Unions. So, you could spin it was an anti-Union vote. But, I think that's digging too deep. At it's very base it was about reduced spending. Now, does a wider audience (The nation) have the same stomach? I hope so.... (And that will be the first meaningful hope this country has seen/heard in 4 years. )

You on the other hand, would like to make up an answer that doesn't change your reality. So, yes. Folks ALL voted b/c they don't like recalls. :roll:

Go Beavers

EdsonNascimento wrote:

Go Beavers wrote:

This is actually spin. The clear message from the Wisconsin recall was that the voters of Wisconsin didn't like the idea of a recall in this situation and that it didn't warrant it.

Ummm. No. There was 1 thing the recall was about: Reduced Spending by cutting off the Unions. So, you could spin it was an anti-Union vote. But, I think that's digging too deep. At it's very base it was about reduced spending. Now, does a wider audience (The nation) have the same stomach? I hope so.... (And that will be the first meaningful hope this country has seen/heard in 4 years. )

You on the other hand, would like to make up an answer that doesn't change your reality. So, yes. Folks ALL voted b/c they don't like recalls. :roll:

I think you're making up an answer to confirm your reality. Read the polling data referenced earlier in the thread. I didn't say 'all' voted because they did't like the recall, but enough did. Watch in November as Wisconsin goes to Obama. Conservatives want to put their spin on the Wisconsin vote and say it's some statement about spending.

EdsonNascimento

Go Beavers wrote:

EdsonNascimento wrote:

Go Beavers wrote:

This is actually spin. The clear message from the Wisconsin recall was that the voters of Wisconsin didn't like the idea of a recall in this situation and that it didn't warrant it.

Ummm. No. There was 1 thing the recall was about: Reduced Spending by cutting off the Unions. So, you could spin it was an anti-Union vote. But, I think that's digging too deep. At it's very base it was about reduced spending. Now, does a wider audience (The nation) have the same stomach? I hope so.... (And that will be the first meaningful hope this country has seen/heard in 4 years. )

You on the other hand, would like to make up an answer that doesn't change your reality. So, yes. Folks ALL voted b/c they don't like recalls. :roll:

I think you're making up an answer to confirm your reality. Read the polling data referenced earlier in the thread. I didn't say 'all' voted because they did't like the recall, but enough did. Watch in November as Wisconsin goes to Obama. Conservatives want to put their spin on the Wisconsin vote and say it's some statement about spending.

I never said which way Wisconsin will go in Nov. It's June. So, that point's irrelevant. Sure, 12% or whatever said they voted against the recall....Ummm. Yeah. Those "reason" polls are always so revealing. :roll: The recall occurred in the first place b/c the people asked for it. Then, they voted AGAINST that? Oooohhhhk.....

And regardless of what you think - reducing spending is the way to go. Period. We can raise taxes, lower taxes, freeze taxes.. .And it will all be a drop in the bucket if we don't reduce spending. And public pensions, etc. in Wisconsin seems to be the first litmus test wheteher you want to spin the spin or not.

Go Beavers

EdsonNascimento wrote:

Go Beavers wrote:

EdsonNascimento wrote:

Ummm. No. There was 1 thing the recall was about: Reduced Spending by cutting off the Unions. So, you could spin it was an anti-Union vote. But, I think that's digging too deep. At it's very base it was about reduced spending. Now, does a wider audience (The nation) have the same stomach? I hope so.... (And that will be the first meaningful hope this country has seen/heard in 4 years. )

You on the other hand, would like to make up an answer that doesn't change your reality. So, yes. Folks ALL voted b/c they don't like recalls. :roll:

I think you're making up an answer to confirm your reality. Read the polling data referenced earlier in the thread. I didn't say 'all' voted because they did't like the recall, but enough did. Watch in November as Wisconsin goes to Obama. Conservatives want to put their spin on the Wisconsin vote and say it's some statement about spending.

I never said which way Wisconsin will go in Nov. It's June. So, that point's irrelevant. Sure, 12% or whatever said they voted against the recall....Ummm. Yeah. Those "reason" polls are always so revealing. :roll: The recall occurred in the first place b/c the people asked for it. Then, they voted AGAINST that? Oooohhhhk.....

And regardless of what you think - reducing spending is the way to go. Period. We can raise taxes, lower taxes, freeze taxes.. .And it will all be a drop in the bucket if we don't reduce spending. And public pensions, etc. in Wisconsin seems to be the first litmus test wheteher you want to spin the spin or not.

You're trying to claim that the Wisconsin vote was a statement about reducing spending, which it wasn't. You're only backing your stance up with spin. I could say the Ohio vote was the first litmus test, not the Wisconsin vote. I could outspin you with the Ohio example.

Jason P

Go Beavers wrote:

You're trying to claim that the Wisconsin vote was a statement about reducing spending, which it wasn't. You're only backing your stance up with spin. I could say the Ohio vote was the first litmus test, not the Wisconsin vote. I could outspin you with the Ohio example.

What would have been your response if Walker had lost??? What would have the voters wanted? Or can we only calculate voter thoughts based on a question from an exit poll?

San Jose ... liberal hot-bed city voting on similar measures?

San Diego ... better known as "the whale's vagina" voting on similar measures?

Several pretty liberal cities ... even though no recall, they must have not liked recalls either, right?