PO-LITICAL

[fervid_dryfire]

Well, the results are in on the Walker recall- 53% to 45%...guess the SEIU/Communist thugs and other mental midgets didn't tell enough lies to make their cause look appealing to enough people.

I'll put down a comment I saw on FB regarding the topic, and let it stand on its own (emphasis mine):

As a Wisconsinite who voted for Walker, I'm sick of

Comments

[skreidle]

Do you think it irrelevant that Walker raised more than $30M for his campaign, 66% of it from out of state, while Barrett raised less than $4M, only 26% of it from out of state? How does the end result of such disparity (due to massive corporate interests and SuperPACs) say anything about the "will of the people"?

[fervid_dryfire]

Yes; and a disparity doesn't inherently say anything about the "will of the people" one way or another. Besides, if you are going to try to tell me that "the spending is predominantly responsible for the resulting votes", then you might as well stop now- because there's no way you will ever be able to convince me of that.

...but, okay- let's pretend for a moment that the money raised matters the most in an election's outcome. From your data, Walker raised $10.2 million (34% of the total) from in-state contributions, which is still DOUBLE Barrett's TOTAL amount raised. Is it really that hard to believe that Walker simply had more support from his constituents when all is said and done

[skreidle]

Tens of millions of dollars from out of state doesn't come from people, it comes from "people" -- corporations -- and I assert that massive corporate funding has no place in fair politics.

Regardless, the union issues were only one aspect of the fraud and corruption endemic in the Walker administration. To quote a friend who is a resident of WI:

"All of the media coverage describes the protest movement as starting over Walker's dissolution of most public worker's collective bargaining rights, which is misleading.

That's /when/ it started. A big chunk of /why/ it started and why it kept going is how those laws were passed - illegally, uncivilly, and heavy-handedly. Considering republicans basically owned the government at that point, they had no need (not that anyone ever has one) to break the law to make laws.

It shows they have utter contempt for the system they're supposed to be working within"

[jordan179]

Tens of millions of dollars from out of state doesn't come from people, it comes from "people" -- corporations -- and I assert that massive corporate funding has no place in fair politics.

Whereas massive union funding and violent activism does? In any case, corporations are owned and operated by people, who have the right to freedom of speech, and they exercised it. And the voters have the right to vote for any candidate or measure they choose, even ones YOU don't like.

That's /when/ it started. A big chunk of /why/ it started and why it kept going is how those laws were passed - illegally, uncivilly, and heavy-handedly. Considering republicans basically owned the government at that point, they had no need (not that anyone ever has one) to break the law to make laws.

How were the laws passed "illegally?" The Republicans had a quorum, and that quorum voted. There is no law stating that if the Democrats boycott a vote, but there is still a quorum, the vote may not proceed. In retrospect, it was strategically FOOLISH for the