"Koch Brothers" Yawn. You sound like kathaksung when you go on about them.
Printable View
"Koch Brothers" Yawn. You sound like kathaksung when you go on about them.
Yes, because we all know the unions and the Democratic party aren't bringing in anyone or anything from out out of state. They are the Real Americans after all.
Then perhaps you should read more about the Koch Brothers, their super-PAC or 501-C, and where they decide to allocate their financial influence. They're reportedly prepared to spend $400-500 million between now and November. How's that such a "yawn"?Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
Will do. Next time I read about the Illuminati, lizard men or tin foil hats.
Is Rand comparing our political landscape to the illuminati? That seems rather dishonest and ignorant :bulb:
Do you?Quote:
Originally Posted by GGT
http://www.startribune.com/politics/153183295.html
MADISON, Wis. - Unemployment rates dropped in most Wisconsin counties and largest cities last month, according to the latest batch of jobs data released Wednesday, less than two weeks before the June 5 recall against Gov. Scott Walker.
Unemployment figures have been a major issue in the campaign, with Walker relying on one set of numbers based on a census of nearly every Wisconsin employer that show the state gained more than 23,000 jobs in 2011.
Walker released those figures last week, a highly unusual move that came before the numbers had been reviewed and finalized by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The numbers won't be finalized until three weeks after the recall.
Walker's opponent, Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, said that because those numbers are preliminary, the data that should be looked at to judge Walker are monthly figures based on a much smaller survey of about 3.5 percent of the state's employers. Those figures show the state lost 33,900 jobs in 2011.
In the past, Walker's administration never quibbled much with that survey, leading opponents to accuse the governor of intentionally clouding the jobs picture before the election.
The new figures released Wednesday by the Department of Workforce Development, an agency within Walker's administration, track local unemployment rates and employment figures for metropolitan areas.
The department's numbers show that 30 of the state's 32 largest cities saw unemployment rate decreases between March and April, with Mount Pleasant experiencing a slight increase from 9 percent to 9.1 percent and Brookfield unchanged.
Racine had the highest unemployment rate at 11.2 percent, while Caledonia had the lowest at 3.4 percent.
Every county's unemployment dropped except Iron County, where the rate increased from 12.7 percent to 12.8 percent. Menominee County's jobless rate was the highest at 15.9 percent, while Dane County had the lowest rate at 4.4 percent.
Job increases were reported in four metropolitan areas — Green Bay, La Crosse, Oshkosh-Neenah, and Sheboygan. Job losses were reported in seven — Appleton, Eau Claire, Fond du Lac, Madison, Milwaukee, Racine and Wausau.
No, I'm comparing conspiracy theories that the Kochs are buying the election, to other whacko conspiracy theories.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer
It's no less a "conspiracy theory" than unions are bringing in big money to influence voters. :bored:Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
But you didn't answer the question --- Why do you want Walker to win the recall election?
Because he's doing an excellent job and the right thing against tough opposition. Why wouldn't you want Walker to win?Quote:
Originally Posted by GGT
This is why I dislike the notion of Recall Elections in general. I like them superficially, but an elected politician should be able to make tough decisions and then get judged on their record.
I think WI should make that decision, and use the options available between elections if they're dissatisfied. Walker is being investigated for corruption (which he denies), unemployment is up, they've lost jobs in the private sector, so his record hasn't been so "excellent". There's more to doing the job, or making tough decisions, than legislating away collective bargaining -- something that wasn't even on his campaign platform -- unless you're a single-issue voter.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
Ohio had an option to recall the legislation against collective bargaining, without having to recall the governor.
I've been wondering about that. This guy seems SUPER-dodgy tbh, not as bad as his aides etc perhaps but even so.Quote:
Originally Posted by GGT
Walker adopted a strategy of "Divide and Conquer" (caught on tape saying so), pandering to the Tea Party arm of the Republican party....where concepts like moderation and compromise are dirty words....and put his own political future ahead of fixing the state's problems. He seems to pledge allegiance to a few of his big corporate donors and/or the extreme wing of the RNC, instead of WI's millions of workers and middle class.
This is like a snapshot into how to govern for the future, what's considered a public "investment" when budgets are busted.....and whether Austerity can, indeed, lead to Prosperity, when public services like Education, Health and Safety are the first things to be cut. Should we ask the Eurozone how that's going?
Too bad his "donors" didn't inject that $30 million directly into small business, infrastructure projects, school districts, or job training. :sour:
Its such a shame as I have respect for you, but you really are hatefully partisan at times aren't you?Quote:
Originally Posted by GGT
:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Koch Industries wiki page
When can we expect the result?
Never mind that I'm thinking of misconduct and criminality and other dodginessQuote:
Originally Posted by GGT
If there's evidence of that its a matter for the Police, or the electorate at the next election.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aimless
Where are you getting this stuff? You're just rambling "he's evil! he's selfish" over and over with zero substance.Quote:
Originally Posted by GGT
Wisconsin's economy has been improving (albeit tepidly, but better than Illinois). Its budget was balanced without tax increases and without massive government layoffs. IE, without "austerity".
Walker has since been contrite about not stopping to properly explain and debate the reforms he got through the legislature. But it doesn't negate the value of those reforms to the people of Wisconsin.
I need to change my underwear.
Walker akbar! Walker akbar! Walker akbar!
http://i48.tinypic.com/110kfp2.png
Quote:
June 5, 2012
Walker Survives Wisconsin Recall Vote
By MONICA DAVEY and JEFF ZELENY
WAUKESHA, Wis. — Gov. Scott Walker, whose decision to cut collective bargaining rights for most public workers set off a firestorm in a state usually known for its political civility, held on to his job on Tuesday, becoming the first governor in the country to survive a recall election and dealing a painful blow to Democrats and labor unions.
Mr. Walker soundly defeated Mayor Tom Barrett of Milwaukee, the Democrats’ nominee in the recall attempt, with most precincts across the state reporting results. The victory by Mr. Walker, a Republican who was forced into an election to save his job less than two years into his first term, ensures that Republicans largely retain control of this state’s capital, and his fast-rising political profile is likely to soar still higher among conservatives.
Here in Waukesha, some Republican voters said the result ended the most volatile partisan fight in memory, one that boiled over 16 months ago in the collective bargaining battle and expanded into scuffles about spending, jobs, taxes, the role and size of government, and more. Democrats, some of whom are already pledging to mount strong challenges for state lawmakers’ seats in November, seemed less sure about the meaning of Mr. Walker’s victory.
“We are a state that has been deeply divided,” Mr. Barrett said in his concession speech in Milwaukee. “It is up to all of us — our side and their side — to listen, to listen to each other.”
The result raised broader questions about the strength of labor groups, who had called hundreds of thousands of voters and knocked on thousands of doors. The outcome also seemed likely to embolden leaders in other states who have considered limits to unions as a way to solve budget problems, but had watched the backlash against Mr. Walker with worry.
Some Republicans said they considered Mr. Walker’s victory one indication that Wisconsin, which President Obama won easily in 2008 and which Democrats have carried in every presidential election since 1988, may be worth battling for this time.
“Obviously, Scott Walker winning tonight means that the Republicans are here for real,” said Reince Priebus, chairman of the Republican National Committee. “Conservatives are here for real.” Mr. Priebus was attending Mr. Walker’s victory party at the Waukesha County Exposition Center, where “We Stand With Walker” signs were all around.
But even with the Republican victory on Tuesday, it remained an open question whether Mitt Romney, the party’s presidential nominee, can assume the momentum of Mr. Walker’s campaign. Exit polls of voters indicated that 18 percent of Mr. Walker’s supporters said they favored Mr. Obama.
Mr. Walker, who raised millions of dollars from conservative donors outside the state, had a strong financial advantage, in part because a quirk in Wisconsin law allowed him months of unlimited fund-raising, from the time the recall challenge was mounted to when the election was officially called. As of late last month, about $45.6 million had been spent on behalf of Mr. Walker, compared with about $17.9 million for Mr. Barrett, according to data from the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, a nonpartisan group that tracks spending.
“What it shows is the peril of corporate dollars in an election and the dangers of Citizens United,” said Dennis Van Roekel, president of the National Education Association, a school workers’ union, referring to the 2010 Supreme Court decision that barred the federal government from restricting political expenditures from corporations, unions and other groups.
Voters went to the polls in droves, and some polling places needed extra ballots brought in as long lines of people waited. One polling location was so swamped, state officials said, that it found itself using photocopied ballots, which then later to be hand-counted. The final flurry of television advertising — with Mr. Walker outspending Mr. Barrett, seven to one — seemed to have little impact on the outcome. Nearly 9 in 10 people said they had made up their minds before May, according to exit poll interviews, with only a sliver of the electorate deciding in the final days of the campaign.
The recall race carried implications well beyond Wisconsin, particularly in the escalating fight between wealthy conservative donors and labor unions. Many Republican contributors from across the country who have invested millions in the presidential race also sent checks to Mr. Walker, hoping to inflict deep wounds on organized labor, a key constituency for Democrats.
The outcome was also being closely monitored in Boston by Mr. Romney’s campaign and in Chicago at Mr. Obama’s re-election headquarters for a signal of how the electorate is viewing the big issues in the race for the White House. The president kept his distance from Wisconsin, to the dismay of many Democrats in the state, in an effort to avoid alienating independent voters he hopes to win over in the fall.
Mr. Obama currently holds an edge over Mr. Romney in Wisconsin, according to exit polling. Voters in the surveys also said they saw Mr. Obama as better-equipped to improve the economy and help the middle class.
A snapshot of the Wisconsin electorate, gleaned through surveys with voters as they left the polls, found that a majority of men had supported Mr. Walker, while most women had voted for Mr. Barrett. Almost a fifth of the electorate was 65 or older, with only about one in 10 voters of college age. The recall race unfolded against a backdrop of economic uncertainty, with only 2 in 10 voters saying their family’s finances have improved in the two years since Mr. Walker was elected. About a third said their financial situation had grown worse, and more than 4 in 10 said their finances had stayed the same.
In Wisconsin, which was the first state to provide collective bargaining rights to public employees, sentiment for unionized workers remains split. A narrow majority of voters on Tuesday had a favorable view of public unions, according to exit polling, while more than 4 in 10 said they held an unfavorable view.
One-third of voters were from union households, up from one-quarter in the 2010 governor’s election.
The political war in Wisconsin began in February 2011 when Governor Walker, only weeks into his first term, announced that he needed to cut benefits and collective bargaining rights for most public workers as a way to solve an expected state budget deficit of $3.6 billion.
Tens of thousands of union supporters and Democrats protested in Madison, the capital, and the State Senate’s Democrats — who were a minority in the chamber but had enough members to prevent a quorum — went into hiding in hotels and houses in Illinois to try, unsuccessfully, to prevent a vote on the measure.
By January, critics of Mr. Walker delivered more than 900,000 signatures on petitions to recall him, far more than the one-quarter of voters from the last election that state law requires.
The election, which cost local governments as much as $18 million to carry out, has raised another debate over the appropriateness of using a recall vote to remove officials.
“Recall was never meant to be used just because you don’t like the way the other side is governing,” said Jenny Beth Martin, a co-founder of the Tea Party Patriots, which made tens of thousands of calls to voters in recent days in support of Mr. Walker.
Monica Davey reported from Waukesha, and Jeff Zeleny from Washington. Steven Yaccino contributed reporting from Waukesha. Marjorie Connelly, Dalia Sussman and Allison Kopicki contributed research from New York.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/06/us...ll-effort.html
What's "partisan" about thinking it's a shame to see those millions of dollars spent on politicians instead of the populace?Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
I'm not hateful, I'm disgusted...by the amount of money thrown around in our politics. I'm frustrated by the partisan bickering about the role of government, when over $2 Trillion in corporate cash is sitting on the sidelines, corporate profits are at historical highs, corporate taxes at historical lows.....but they're waiting for 'government' to do something that favors them? Their hypocrisy is showing. :rolleyes:
I don't buy into their confidence excuse, or the Confidence Fairy. I also don't buy into the myth that taking away workers' rights to collectively bargain is the panacea for public budget problems. I especially don't like it when either party uses tactics to create more division, polarity, or Us vs Them attitudes. Especially when it involves demonizing public school teachers, police, fire fighters.
IMO, unions had less to do with the mess, than legislators beholden to their donors. And I don't think corporatism, or crony capitalism, is a better way to run a state, than it was when labor unions were the biggest donors.
WI decided to give voters an option between full terms and next general elections. It's a form of petition, and redress of grievances, as written in the constitution. Maybe your parliamentary system doesn't have that option (?)Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
I find it rather pathetic that you'd think the electorate should just suck it up, and wait for the next election, when so many procedural violations and "dodgy" laws were made, forcing through legislation without a quorum, changing the rules as they went along. There really IS more to WI than just your single-issue anti-union point of view. :donkey:
BTW, there's now reportedly a corruption investigation by the DoJ, and the FEC is looking into charges that Walker's camp made voter suppression robo-calls to (surprise!) registered Democrats, telling them their vote was counted in the primary referendum, and they don't need to vote again.
I've never used the words evil or selfish, where are YOU getting this stuff? :donkey: Read the news, watch legislative sessions on C-Span (even youtube) that show the history differently than your portrayal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreadnaught
Walker "balanced the budget" in part by mis-allocating federal funds meant for the housing/mortgage mess. He "raised taxes" by removing homestead credits for middle income earners, gave tax credits to businesses and transferred the costs to homeowner property tax payers.
The "reforms" were already agreed to by the public union employees: less benefits, paying larger portions from wages, lower wages, etc. There was no need to write legislation stripping the right to bargain, after the compromises had already been made. He "went rogue" and that's why people got pissed. Everyone knows reform was needed, but how it's done is an important component in governance and diplomacy. Now he's busy "reforming" his image. This is why people hate politicians, become apathetic and distrustful of institutions. :rolleyes:
Walker 2016! Walker 2016! Walker 2016!
The fact that you blamed solely one side (the side that is actually providing real jobs to people).Quote:
Originally Posted by GGT
Then why mention the corporate donations and not the union donations?Quote:
I'm not hateful, I'm disgusted...by the amount of money thrown around in our politics. I'm frustrated by the partisan bickering about the role of government, when over $2 Trillion in corporate cash is sitting on the sidelines, corporate profits are at historical highs, corporate taxes at historical lows.....but they're waiting for 'government' to do something that favors them? Their hypocrisy is showing. :rolleyes:
Thankfully WI disagreed with you :)Quote:
I don't buy into their confidence excuse, or the Confidence Fairy. I also don't buy into the myth that taking away workers' rights to collectively bargain is the panacea for public budget problems. I especially don't like it when either party uses tactics to create more division, polarity, or Us vs Them attitudes. Especially when it involves demonizing public school teachers, police, fire fighters.
With unions being one of the biggest donors. Good to see that being tackled.Quote:
IMO, unions had less to do with the mess, than legislators beholden to their donors. And I don't think corporatism, or crony capitalism, is a better way to run a state, than it was when labor unions were the biggest donors.
No it doesn't. In an ideal world I'd like it to, but I'm glad it doesn't in reality - at least in this format. I do not see how it is appropriate to have an election, have one side lose, then the losers need less signatures in their petition than they lost with in the election and get to fight it again. At the very least it should require more than 50% of the last elections voters, not 25%Quote:
WI decided to give voters an option between full terms and next general elections. It's a form of petition, and redress of grievances, as written in the constitution. Maybe your parliamentary system doesn't have that option (?)
Quorom was never designed to provide the shocking antics of running out of state by the Democrats either, that was a total abuse of the rules.Quote:
I find it rather pathetic that you'd think the electorate should just suck it up, and wait for the next election, when so many procedural violations and "dodgy" laws were made, forcing through legislation without a quorum, changing the rules as they went along. There really IS more to WI than just your single-issue anti-union point of view. :donkey:
Sore loser.Quote:
BTW, there's now reportedly a corruption investigation by the DoJ, and the FEC is looking into charges that Walker's camp made voter suppression robo-calls to (surprise!) registered Democrats, telling them their vote was counted in the primary referendum, and they don't need to vote again.
Given the alleged supression was turnout UP or DOWN on the last election?
It is my understanding that turnout was UP by nearly 25% on the previous election with nearly half a million extra votes cast.
And who won? :bulb:Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
The elected governor, with a swing to him and even more votes than he'd got elected on the previous time. :)
It really is sad to see people acting like sore losers, especially on such a high turnout the decision was made fairly for the scond time.
So what you're saying is that attempts at voter suppression is okay? :bulb:
No I'm saying that I don't believe voter suppression happened and such claims of voter suppression are bullshit.
Aaaand we're back to you and your beliefs, even though the larger number of votes cast doesn't say anything at all in and of itself about whether or not attempts at voter suppression occurred. Re. the phony flyers/absentee ballots from 2011 ie. not this election, iirc AFP has admitted to sending out those flyers with the incorrect return dates and incorrect addresses. So back to the question: are attempts at voter suppression okay?
No they're not. Nor are they relevant here, there is no evidence that votes were suppressed here, quite the contrary. Voting was at a high.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aimless
Why can't people just do the honourable thing and concede defeat?
I've come to realize that Democrats scream false accusations about voter suppression (and Republicans scream about ballot stuffing/miscounting) during every election that they lose. It scared me a lot when I voted for Kerry in 2004, but I've now seen this ugly pattern each time. It's just part of party lore.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aimless
This rumor is highly likely to be somewhere between somewhat-true-but-insignificant and total garbage. Voter turnout was quite substantial relative to the norm.
**************
The forces of progress notched another victory last night. Voters in the city of San Jose, California and San Diego, California voted ~70% to cut retirement benefits for unionized public sector workers. In case you haven't heard of California, it's sort of like the US version of Greece, except with people who actually work. San Jose and San Diego retirement benefits had been sucking-up astonishingly high portions of municipal budgets and voters had enough.
In three separate contests, US voters pushed back fairly hard against the corruption of public sector unionism. The Jihad for fiscal sanity fights on. :up:
Quote:
June 6, 2012
Voters in California Appear to Approve Pension Cuts
By IAN LOVETT
LOS ANGELES — As Wisconsin residents voted on Tuesday not to recall Gov. Scott Walker — who has become an enemy of labor unions nationwide — two California cities dealt blows of their own to organized labor.
In both San Diego and San Jose, voters appeared to overwhelmingly approve ballot initiatives designed to help balance ailing municipal budgets by cutting retirement benefits for city workers.
Around 70 percent of San Jose voters favored the pension reform measure, with almost 80 percent of precincts reporting. In San Diego, 67 percent had supported a similar pension reform measure, with more than 65 percent of precincts reporting.
“This is really important to our taxpayers,” Chuck Reed, the mayor of San Jose, said Tuesday night. “We’ll get control over these skyrocketing retirement costs and be able to provide the services they are paying for.”
Statewide, voters also remained very closely divided on a $1-per-pack tax on cigarettes, which would be the first increase in the cigarette tax here in 14 years. Proceeds from the tax would not go to state coffers, but would instead fund cancer research.
Just past midnight, opponents of the measure held a razor-thin lead, with about 65 percent of precincts reporting.
Antismoking advocates, who promoted the tax as the best way to reduce smoking rates, were outspent nearly four to one. Their opponents, financed largely by the tobacco industry, spent almost $47 million in advertisements to defeat the measure.
Public employee unions, meanwhile, had fought hard against the two pension reform initiatives.
The San Diego Municipal Employees Association brought an unsuccessful legal challenge in an effort to keep the measure off the ballot.
Speaking to KPBS, a local television station, Michael Zucchet, general manager of the San Diego Municipal Employees Association, said last month the ballot initiative would not save the city money.
“This initiative doesn’t save anything,” Mr. Zucchet said. “You are basically cutting off your nose to spite your face for pension reform.”
Mr. Zucchet did not respond to requests for comment on Tuesday night.
But the mayors of both cities pushed the pension reforms hard, arguing that changes to city worker pensions were essential to keep municipal budgets in the black.
Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, said he hoped the initiatives would provide models for other cities and for the state government, where pension reform efforts have stalled. “The appetite for pension reform in California is huge,” Mr. Coupal said.
Tuesday also offered the first widespread test of the state’s new primary system, in which the top two vote-getters move on to a runoff, irrespective of party affiliation.
One of the most heavily funded races will pit two sitting Democratic representatives against each other: Brad Sherman and Howard L. Berman, colleagues in the House for 15 years who were thrown together by redistricting.
Mr. Sherman had collected about 40 percent of the vote, while Mr. Berman had 33 percent, with about 18 percent of precincts reporting late Tuesday. They will face each other again in the November runoff.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/07/us...s-suggest.html
So basically what you are saying is indeed that attempts at voter suppression are/would be okay as long as you don't see any evidence of votes being suppressed in terms of absolute numbers :bulb: that's just the weirdest.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
There may or may not be evidence of votes actually being suppressed/results being skewed, although the total voter turnout in and of itself does not constitute such evidence. High voter turnout does not disprove attempted voter suppression, just as the outcome does not in and of itself prove that voter suppression was attempted.
There is some evidence that attempts at voter suppression were made and that those attempts seemed designed to benefit Walker. Absentee ballots with phony dates and addresses, numerous and independent reports of people being spammed with false information about voting or encouraged to block the phone services of the opponent's campaign. That evidence exists, in the form of scanned documents and in the form of hearsay as reports from citizens; the question is how much of that evidence is true. That question cannot be answered by your gut, believe it or not :bulb:
I'm a bit baffled by Dread's line of reasoning. The existence of voter suppression claims = proof that voter suppression isn't attempted? :bulb: what the what?
The existence of claims =! evidence of wide-scale suppression efforts. My point is these claims are recurring and happen all the time right after elections, but usually end up being nothing.
There are no real "independent reports" out there, it's mostly just rumors and predictable partisan rabble. This stuff is commonly farted out after each election to keep the "base" motivated. The Republicans did it after Obama won with accusations of ballot stuffing in black neighborhoods of Ohio and Pennsylvania.
Anything is possible, but these specific things are claims Democrats start rumormongering after almost every high-profile election that they lose. The claims and rumors never really go very far. Ironically, the Democratic party and Obama vigorously opposes strengthening voter ID requirements to help give people more confidence in their votes (and their right to vote). Then, after each election, they claim that someone told a bunch of college students/hispanics some lie about their voter eligibility. When that eligibility would be much clearer if we had a simple, transparent ID check at the polls against state databases. But that's sort of a tangent.
Uhm, but the private sector is NOT providing real jobs to people. WI's private sector lost more jobs than it gained, despite Walker's policies that promised otherwise.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
Because "union donations" were diminutive compared to "corporate donations" (including private monies that came from out-of-state, or from super PACs). With RNC party money, Walker received ~ $60 million, while his challenger received less than $4 million. Put that on a pie chart (or WI cheese wheel) and chew on it a while. :donkey:Quote:
Then why mention the corporate donations and not the union donations?
Would you like to see the Tea Party continue to dominate the Republican party, future state elections, and push for Austerity? The same type of Austerity the UK is trying, which led to a double-dip recession and double digit unemployment? That's a bit confusing and paradoxical.Quote:
Thankfully WI disagreed with you :)
Now you're just spouting nonsense because it fits into your narrative. Unions haven't been major campaign donors for at least a decade, if not longer. :rolleyes:Quote:
With unions being one of the biggest donors. Good to see that being tackled.
The point is that each state designs their own constitution and state laws. Including what it takes to impeach, censor, or punish an incumbent.... or hold a recall election. I'm not a fan of ballot initiatives for budgets, let alone limiting civil rights...but it's particularly egregious when legislators abuse protocol, or change rules during engagement. Quorum, majority or super-majority, in-session adjournments, and filibusters have all been abused at state and federal levels. That is NOT governing, that is politicking, with baggage. :sour:Quote:
No it doesn't. In an ideal world I'd like it to, but I'm glad it doesn't in reality - at least in this format. I do not see how it is appropriate to have an election, have one side lose, then the losers need less signatures in their petition than they lost with in the election and get to fight it again. At the very least it should require more than 50% of the last elections voters, not 25%
Quorom was never designed to provide the shocking antics of running out of state by the Democrats either, that was a total abuse of the rules.
Sore loser.
You've made your conclusion before any investigation has been concluded, and less than 24 hours after the election. You ran with the blurb that DoJ and FEC was called to investigate, but we're supposed to consider your opinion as objective? :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
You keep blaming the Kochs, their company employs 90,000 people. Without forcing money off others with the threat of jail if they don't give it.Quote:
Originally Posted by GGT
You think $4 million is diminuitive? And couldn't be better spent? Not that those figures are remotely matching those mentioned up-threadQuote:
Because "union donations" were diminutive compared to "corporate donations" (including private monies that came from out-of-state, or from super PACs). With RNC party money, Walker received ~ $60 million, while his challenger received less than $4 million. Put that on a pie chart (or WI cheese wheel) and chew on it a while. :donkey:
Didn't Obama out-spend McCain? I don't recall you solely criticising Obama's backers on that occasion. As I said, partisan.Quote:
Originally Posted by New Article earlier
Yes definitely! Is my philosophy a surprise to you? If I was an American I'd be an atheist Tea Partier. I've believed we're Taxed Enough Already since before the Tea Party came to the fore and have been pushing for what you call austerity since before it was happening. I've also said that not only do I support what the UK government is doing but if it was upto me they'd be cutting further and faster. Our austerity is so "severe" that spending is going up every single year. :rolleyes:Quote:
Would you like to see the Tea Party continue to dominate the Republican party, future state elections, and push for Austerity? The same type of Austerity the UK is trying, which led to a double-dip recession and double digit unemployment? That's a bit confusing and paradoxical.
Where did you get the notion we have double-digit unemployment from either? The UK unemployment rate is 8.2% and falling! In contrast the USA with its Obama-stimulus (which I opposed) following its Bush-stimulus (also opposed) has an unemployment rate of 8.1% - that's a rounding error difference.
Why is it confusing and paradoxical that I support the same for the US that I voted for and support for my own nation? Did you have me mistaken for a Labour voter who opposed austerity here?
Quote:
Now you're just spouting nonsense because it fits into your narrative. Unions haven't been major campaign donors for at least a decade, if not longer. :rolleyes:
What can I say here? :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Again news article in this thread
Yet you've again criticised one side only. I don't recall you criticising the Democrat Senators for pathetically abandoning their jobs and fleeing out of state, did you?Quote:
The point is that each state designs their own constitution and state laws. Including what it takes to impeach, censor, or punish an incumbent.... or hold a recall election. I'm not a fan of ballot initiatives for budgets, let alone limiting civil rights...but it's particularly egregious when legislators abuse protocol, or change rules during engagement. Quorum, majority or super-majority, in-session adjournments, and filibusters have all been abused at state and federal levels. That is NOT governing, that is politicking, with baggage. :sour:
By the way anyone know how many of his aides have agreed to testify against the principals of the campaign in return for immunity? :o
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/0...nt-Culpability
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/0...e-is-the-charm
How long has that investigation been going on btw? Three years and counting? How about that legal defense fund btw? The drama
Thats just hard money, and you know that after complaining about it all the time. Dig up figures with soft money, then do a comparison.Quote:
Originally Posted by GGT
$4 million is small compared to $40-60 million, yeah. So far, just in state primaries and elections, and "big media buys", more money has been spent than during McCain's entire presidential campaign. That's fucked up, no matter which party you like. (ps, I didn't like Obama tacking to private funding instead of public funding either)Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
Goody for you. Your atheist side probably wouldn't agree with Walker's speech, where he gave first thanks to God and prayer for his success. The Tea Party is dominated by fundamental Christians, and likes to hear that candidates "have been called by God" to serve in government. They wouldn't let you in their little club, as an atheist, see. They had a hard enough time with Romney (as a "non-Christian Mormon cult member). :rolleyes:Quote:
Yes definitely! Is my philosophy a surprise to you? If I was an American I'd be an atheist Tea Partier. I've believed we're Taxed Enough Already since before the Tea Party came to the fore and have been pushing for what you call austerity since before it was happening. I've also said that not only do I support what the UK government is doing but if it was upto me they'd be cutting further and faster. Our austerity is so "severe" that spending is going up every single year. :rolleyes:
The eurozone has an average of ~ 12% unemployment, including Ireland, Spain, Italy, Portugal, Greece, etc. Youth unemployment is 20-25%, even among college graduates. It's rather hard to pin down unemployment when so many are leaving their home countries to find work, or just give up looking and withdraw to their parents' basements. :bored:Quote:
Where did you get the notion we have double-digit unemployment from either? The UK unemployment rate is 8.2% and falling! In contrast the USA with its Obama-stimulus (which I opposed) following its Bush-stimulus (also opposed) has an unemployment rate of 8.1% - that's a rounding error difference.
Because your country has put education and health as priority funding, even during austerity measures and budget cuts, amid political in-fighting, that's why. You used to support the NHS, at least in principle, and publicly funded education, too. Maybe you've had a change of heart that way, I don't know, but you did start a thread asking what it costs US citizens to buy their own health insurance.Quote:
Why is it confusing and paradoxical that I support the same for the US that I voted for and support for my own nation? Did you have me mistaken for a Labour voter who opposed austerity here?
I criticized the senate rules, abuse of those rules, and lamented that WI citizens suffered for what their elected officials couldn't accomplish. I've said this before in other threads, but I'll say it again as an update:Quote:
What can I say here? :rolleyes:
Yet you've again criticised one side only. I don't recall you criticising the Democrat Senators for pathetically abandoning their jobs and fleeing out of state, did you?
When elected legislators can't manage to do the work they were elected to do---their salaries should be held in escrow, they shouldn't be allowed to vote their own pay raises, they should be barred from taking "living expense" donations, and their publicly funded healthcare and retirement benefits should cancelled.
I think you are being overly dramatic about the meaning behind the WI result. I do not think it was a rejection of Walker's policies, but I also don't think it was a wholehearted endorsement. I find it more likely that the majority of (non-unionized) people in WI felt that the recall was unjustified. That's a significant difference from 'pushing back against corrupt unions'.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreadnaught
I think that WI voters felt as I do that Walker should be given a genuine chance to see if his changes are worthwhile. The recall was not a good idea, and voters responded appropriately. That doesn't mean that his policies are necessarily popular or successful. We'll have to wait a few more years to see about that.
Well, to be honest wiggin, pundits on both sides of the aisle were overblowing the recall in this way. Dread is just one more caught up in the hooplah.Quote:
Originally Posted by wiggin
I do agree with you on the Recall in general. I don't like them (but WI has the ability to do so, it's their right)...but I think recalls are just another stumbling block for politicians to attempt to do anything meaningful (right or left). It's bad enough that they need to worry about re-election normally, add a recall to the mix and executives can get paralyzed with fear and tons of money wasted. (And GGT, the 30 million + that got wasted by those you don't like would not have been so if the was not a recall to begin with. And in 2 years, they will be doing it again for re-election)
I think recall elections should be reserved for politicians who should be recalled, not for politicians who are doing what they were elected to do. So unless his actions are far from his election promises, i see no need for a recall. I probably wouldn't vote for a recall, even if I didn't support his policies
Agreed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flixy