What Does Wisconsin’s Recall Failure Mean for the Country?
Does the failure to recall Gov. Scott Walker last week spell trouble for the Democrats in November, and ultimately public unions, or is it much ado about nothing that is really just a Wisconsin state issue?
Now that it’s almost a week since the recall election in Wisconsin went down without Gov. Scott Walker losing his job, the pundits are still debating what, if anything, it means for the rest of the country. Some, Like Thomas Grier in an op-ed in The Daily Caller, say it’s a forerunner to what can be expected in November. Others, like in an article in Democracy Now, say it was an example of how big money can sway an election. But even then, it heralds a caution sign for what might come in November.
Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney appears to be gaining ground in the money game, raising $17 million more than President Barack Obama in May, not a good sign if big money is the answer.
So what do you think? Was Walker’s success in standing up to the Unions and then surviving the recall a forerunner of what to expect in November? Or was it just a state issue that doesn't have an impact on the rest of the country?
North Georgia Weather
12:02 pm on Monday, June 11, 2012
The tide is beginning to turn.
Tammy Osier
12:15 pm on Monday, June 11, 2012
It shows that people are finally beginning to understand what government control means and what unions do to abuse their power. Hopefully, people are beginning to see that the federal government has too big a role and that's never good. In fact, our government was founded on that premise, along with warnings in the event that government oversteps its bounds. For a while there, I was afraid that people were being hypnotized into following along with anything, all the way to the demise of the nation if possible. Funny, that the democrats there still can't see that it was not about who had more money, but that people disagree with their policies; just can't take responsibility. When I hear the whining start, I always see Nancy Pelosi's face. What a role model she's been for the party. lol
Rebecca McCarthy
1:00 pm on Monday, June 11, 2012
There are lots of whiners in both political parties. But if you check, you will notice that the money funding the Walker campaign came primarily from out-of-state PACs and businesses. I think this means the November election is going to be a spending frenzy. But of course, who really knows?
Tammy Osier
2:46 pm on Monday, June 11, 2012
Agreed Rebecca. I think that if much of his money came from out of state, that means that the sentiment of "too much government control has got to go" is more widespread than we think, which, to me, is a good thing. While I don't think more money in this particular issue was why he won, I do agree that it matters. If Herman Cain had had more money to run more ads, people might have know more about him and not given as much credence to those trying to smear him. Facetime does count. I just think it laughable that Obama is courting movie stars for money though. What is it about Democrat presidential candidates having to run on the pretty face, popularity thing? I think Mitt Romney having money to wage a competative campaign has them running scared. Hope so.
Rebecca McCarthy
4:13 pm on Monday, June 11, 2012
Ronald Reagan, the be-all-end-all cited Republican, was himself a movie star, as was Der Arnold, governor of California. John Wayne was a big Republican, as was Mr. NRA, Charlton Heston. Hollywood types have lots and lots of money, and everyone of every political stripe calls there for contributions.
Clark Rabb
4:05 pm on Monday, June 11, 2012
I wish it was a requirement to know what you're talking about before engaging in political discourse.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoconnor/2012/06/05/gov-scott-walkers-big-money-backers-include-13-out-of-state-billionaires/
Rebecca McCarthy
4:14 pm on Monday, June 11, 2012
Clark, think maybe we can get that legislated?
GregRodgers
8:46 am on Tuesday, June 12, 2012
It means that Government is for sale to whoever has the most money. Therefore, special interests will always win and the people will always lose.
He who spends the most money (or has it infused into his coffers) wins.
We the people should just pack it in......as long as a race is bought and paid for someone or group will always be waiting in the background with their hands out waiting for the payoff.
Karsten Torch
5:30 pm on Friday, June 15, 2012
Truthfully, though, I'm not sure the money spent really had a lot to do with the outcome. The people are pretty tired of unions and their thug tactics, Walker had done nothing wrong, the recall was a sham, and people knew it. I'm sure the money had something to do with it, but I seriously doubt the outcome would have been any different regardless. But what this really says to me is that the unions and their stooges in Washington, Obama being the biggest one, really need to watch out, because people are tired of what's going on. This gave me warm fuzzy feelings for the outcome in November.....
Tammy Osier
6:07 pm on Friday, June 15, 2012
karsten, if people will look into the past year or two, they'll find a great unrest amongst the 'little people". Money can buy nice commercials and facetime, but, in this case, it was the people who did the voting.