Why is Walker's Win So Damaging?

[ilikeitthatway]

I feel so stupid asking this, but can someone lay it out for me why it was so important to recall him? I've heard that it hurts Obama's reelection, but I'm not sure how. I've also heard that it hurts a Dem takeover of Congress.

Why was this recall so damn important? I get that it's really bad that big money was able to basically buy an election, but what are the political implications for the 2012 election?

TIA.

[jberryhill]

1. The guy who was governor of Wisconsin yesterday...

...is going to be the governor of Wisconsin tomorrow.

[ilikeitthatway]

3. Ah

He's likely to be indicted though.

What power does the Gov. hold in a state when it comes to Presidential elections? Is it that they have a prime platform to give their Party's candidate?

[BamaFanLee]

37. He needs to be indicted this year

We should not rest until Walker is led away from his office in handcuffs.

[TheWraith]

2. Truthfully, it's really not.

State-level elections and the issues that decide them have very little effect on federal politics, which means congressional and presidential. This is bad for Wisconsin, but has very little effect outside of their other than that the Republicans will be crowing like roosters for a few days. But the things that decided this race aren't going to be even a whisper of wind come November.

[snappyturtle]

6. EXCEPT that Walker is now the poster-child to less

aggressive governors who will now feel empowered. imho

[TheWraith]

14. Meh. He can be a poster child once he's indicted. nt

[CTyankee]

38. I love it!

I have a mental picture now...

[HereSince1628]

7. State-level elections...have very little effect on federal politics, HAH!!!!!!

Well only if you completely ignore the reality that there is a coalition, a confederacy of corporate interests that are buying state legislatures and imposing an interstate system of corporate written and corporate sponsored laws that server corporations.

If every in your state thinks like you, your state is screwed.

[earthside]

8. Truthfully, it really is.

Americans like to vote for winners -- this evening, Democrats, progressives, unions, liberals and Pres. Obama are seen as big losers.

The agenda of the reactionary Repuglicans has had an impressive victory -- that is how all of the Washington/New York media and most political pundits will spin this. Furthermore, it gives Karl Rove and the reactionary super PACs all the evidence they need that big, big money will triumph in the end.

The results will clearly embolden all those other reactionary governors and state legislatures out there -- prepare for more union busting and more voter suppression laws.

This will not be a 'one day wonder' kind of outcome, the Repuglicans will see to that.

Indeed, the greatest danger to Pres. Obama's reelection is the attitude that this results is meaningless and unimportant ... keep that notion and you'll be looking at Pres. Rmoney in January 2013.

Of course, perhaps this can all be reversed with a presidential Tweet ... who knows?

[TheWraith]

15. Pfft. Nonsense.

Nobody can realistically tag Obama, the national party, etcetera for losing a race that wasn't their responsibility, and wasn't likely to be won.

[pstokely]

21. And wasn't even involved in

nt

[zanana1]

29. You tell 'em, The Wraith.

Don't let the bastards get you down.

[okieinpain]

22. so why did the people of wi vote

for walker. in Oklahoma I know why they would do it, its an ass backwards place.

[Hawaii Hiker]

12. I agree....President Obama has lead consistently in WI.

and will almost certainly win there in 5 months....

It's tough to beat an incumbent, and recent polls did show Walker leading in the recall, and President Obama leading in the general election...Even todays exit polls showed Obama with a 51-45 advantage over etch-a-sketch..

[ilikeitthatway]

4. Are unions in a lot of trouble under Walker?

I keep hearing union bashing. I honestly don't understand people. Do they not realize how much they owe to organized labor?

[CTyankee]

39. Evidently, they don't. It's like a lot of things. People take the rights they have for granted.

We act like Cassandras, for good reason. Then they get their rights infringed upon and they're all mad. Well, guess what? We told you so...

[snappyturtle]

5. To me his win says the people back him in busting the

unions among other things....which I find devastating.
His win will bolster Governor Daniels, et. al. to proceed
with taking from the 99% to line the pockets and up
the profit line for his corporate friends. imho

Welcome to DU!

[JDPriestly]

9. This is more a win for Citizens United than for Walker.

And that is why it is such bad news.

It means that all candidates, whether Republican or Democratic will be picked by, supported by and ultimately elected by corporate money.

The Wisconsin Democrats were as active as any people's movement could be. They worked harder than just about any movement ever has.

But they were outspent 34 million to 4 million.

All their enthusiasm and work, even the press attention they got, could not overcome the financial investment that big business made in this election.

One of the volunteers for Barrett said Democracy died tonight.

Actually, Democracy went into its death throes when the Supreme Court ruled on Citizens United. Tonight its dying agony ended. It breathed its last breath.

We will continue to have two parties. The Democrats will be slightly to the left of the Republicans. But no one will really represent the economic or other interests of ordinary people. And there will never be enough money for groups outside the establishment to compete for office in any meaningful way.

[jberryhill]

10. Did federal spending rules ever apply to state gubernatorial elections in the first place?

Could you sketch out the connection between the CU decision and this state election?

[JDPriestly]

17. The fact is that since Citizens United, the war chests of the corporations have grown

much faster than they did before. Many states have no laws restricting campaign spending by corporations.

Los Angeles had a regulation, but I am not sure what effect Citizens United has on it because if regulating the speech of the corporations at the federal level is unconstitutional, it may be unconstitutional for states to do it also. I am unaware that has been tested, but if I recall correctly, a state can protect and enlarge rights guaranteed under the US Constitution but not narrow them.

Any experts have anything to say about this. This is an aspect of First Amendment rights that I don't know about.

[JDPriestly]

20. Apparently another DUer explained that Walker was able to gather a lot of coporate money

at a certain moment in the contest -- while Democrats were fighting amongst themselves for the nomination.

[jberryhill]

28. That still would have no relation to any federal campaign spending law

[joshcryer]

30. Yeah, Barrett had 5 weeks to build his war chest. Walker had almost more money than the DLC...

...had on hand. It's insanity.

[flamingdem]

27. NOt just money though. Strategy was at work big time

And that's what we need to note, at least we can do something about that.

Walker targeted the rural areas, he scared them over guns, what else?

I'm sure they'll be much talk of it -- maybe we can learn something

[Larkspur]

11. The Unions were in a Catch-22 position

Walker attacked them shortly after getting into office. Their ranks have decreased at this point to almost half of what they were before Walker took office.

If they waited until 2014, they may not be in existence, so the recall effort was their best shot. They did collect a million signatures, 500,000 more than they needed to get the recall, so it looked like momentum was on their side.

But Walker took advantage of a loophole in WI law that allowed him to accept donations to his campaign until the recall signatures were officially verified. He had about a month or so to do that and the Koch Brothers et al helped him out a lot. Meanwhile, the Democrats had a primary to choose their candidate for the recall election and then Barrett only had a month til the recall general election.

[JDPriestly]

19. The primary was a stupid mistake. Sometimes backroom deals are the best policy.

This year, Obama is unopposed for re-nomination in the Democratic Party. I'm not really happy with what he has done, but it is probably a wise use of the limited money and resources we have to simply nominate him since he would win the nomination anyway. Sometimes you have to think strategically in that sense.

Apparently the Democrats in Wisconsin weren't able to organize themselves to use the limited resources they had to best advantage. Some strong guidance -- not compulsion but discussion -- from the national party might have been able to change that.

[okieinpain]

23. great post. n/t.

[joshcryer]

31. I think actually that the primary was fine, I think having the recall in June as opposed to Nov...

...was a really tough choice. They didn't want the momentum to deflate from now until November, but by the same token, they risked, strongly, a low turnout for the Democrats (and while it was higher than 2010 it was much lower than 2008; the Walker people actually turned out in numbers higher than 2008).

[dkf]

13. It emboldens other governors to go after public unions.

Unions are the biggest source of organizational funding for the Democratic party. If you decimate their ranks you decimate their dues and their political contributions.

[Dr Fate]

25. No worries. This is why the Kochs funded the DLC in the 1st place.

So that we don't have to be beholden to unions and other unpopular fringe groups for money and support.

Don't worry- Centrist DEMS can get money w/o Unions, and they are the only ones who win anymore any how.

[One of the 99]

16. And the others guys spent $30 Million

to maintain the status quo. $30 Million they can't spend in another election.

[Dr Fate]

18. it's not. Centrists do not want to be beholden to Unions any way.

the whole point of centrism is to get the party out from under the thumb of fringe groups and unions- so that we can appeal to mainstream voters AKA the "Reagan Democrats"

It's not the worse thing in the world if Obama can blame the shellacking on liberals, unions etc- It means he can run on the more popular centrist positions and win again.

THEN maybe he can do some liberal stuff, but he has to win first.

[okieinpain]

24. funny thing to me is fox news really

isn't celebrating this win big time. the few minutes that I watch them they were trying to figure out the Obama/walker voter. maybe its really true that people thought the recall was wrong.

[Zambero]

26. The Ohio approach vs. the Wisconsin approach

In Ohio, the recent election dealt with issues and not candidates. Progressives won when voters had a chance to consider rejecting specific policies implemented by a hard right anti-union governor. One problem with recalls is that a percentage of voters do not agree with them in principle, even if they don't support the policies of the officeholder being recalled. Perhaps the better tactic is to follow the Ohio example and go after unpopular policies and laws enacted by these people. Then work to remove them from office once their terms expire, when a recall election is not a distracting issue unto itself.

[CTyankee]

40. We really don't know if that would have worked given the other circumstances. However,

it is a fair point. It wouldn't hurt to look at it that way for the future.

[joshcryer]

32. Let's look at that. Walker got 6% more votes than McCain in 2008.

Let's assume that all of McCain's votes went to Walker and that the 6% extra voters who voted were really just tired of the recall stuff (McCain's vote divided by Walker's vote 1262393 / 1331076).

Walker got 1,331,076 in the recall election. 1,331,076 + 6% = 1,410,940 votes. Respectable.

Except that Obama got 1,677,211 votes in 2008. Had Barret got 1,677,211 - 6% of votes he would've had 1,576,578 votes.

Barrett: 1,576,578

Walker: 1,410,940

Barrett by 165,638 votes! Had the turnout been similar to 2008 Barret would've won by 165,638 votes!

Even assuming 6% of voters were just pissed off and annoyed about the recall.

Frustrating, eh?

[sweetapogee]

33. what to do?

A good day to call in, stay in bed, read a book, call room service .eh?

[GeorgeGist]

34. After he's indicted it may be a blessing.

[gkhouston]

35. Because of all the lies that will be told about it.

We'll be told it's a mandate for Republicans, austerity, anti-union, you name it. We're not going to hear much about all the money that went into voter suppression and deceitful advertising. Not sure we'll even hear that much on the media about the disparity between the campaigns as to how much money was spent, and where it came from.

[Blue_Tires]

36. it's laid out pretty well here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/125143505