April 4, 2012

Potential Walker recall opponents fight amongst themselves.

This looks painful. The more moderate Democrat — Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett — is getting nastily attacked proponents of the more left-wing candidate, Kathleen Falk. Here's the viral anti-Barrett ad (which hits him from the left):



That's going to hurt. Barrett looks far out of line with the spirit that drove the recall petitioning. And Walker's opponent will come straight from a battle with other Democrats. There's less than a month between the primary and the recall election. Based on that ad and predicting the attitudes that will develop in the next month leading up to the primary, I'm guessing Kathleen Falk will be Walker's opponent.

UPDATE: The Journal Sentinel does a fact check on this ad and concludes:
The largest state employee union says Barrett supported Walker’s bill to strip most collective bargaining rights from public employees. The group cites a video that includes a snippet of a radio interview in which Barrett suggests a way to break the stalemate.

Barrett did say it was important to separate the higher pension and health care payments from the collective bargaining changes. But he made it clear this was so the piece with broad support -- even from the unions -- could move forward.

In the part cut from the video, Barrett clearly states: "I would vote no on the changes in collective bargaining."

We rate the union’s claim False.

80 comments:

Michael Haz said...

I can hardly wait for the Barrett / Falk debate. The entire debate will be nothing more than who will give more to the union and how much taxes will be increased.

Walker will win the recall election.

bagoh20 said...

Can we put a whole state on suicide watch?

john said...

"Hundreds of thousands" of demonstrators in Madison?

Or did they say "hundreds or thousands"?

Michael K said...

If there is a debate, it should be an eyeopener for the tax payers.

shiloh said...

"I'm guessing Kathleen Falk will be Walker's opponent."

Sounds more like hopin'/wishin'/prayin' than guessing, but it may not matter as the WI recall is all about Walker, just like the CA recall was all about Davis.

Californians were so eager to get rid of Davis, they replaced him w/the kindergarten cop! :D

Alex said...

shiloh shouldn't feel so exuberant when hard-left Democratic mayor of Los Angeles is actively railing against unions.

LA teacher union rails against mayor

Be careful what you wish for shiloh.

edutcher said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
edutcher said...

Seriously, a vigorous debate among the Demos isn't necessarily a bad thing, but, if it turns off, the indies and the moderate Demos who see the good Walker is doing, then they're fried.

Sounds more like hopin'/wishin'/prayin' than guessing, but it may not matter as the WI recall is all about Walker, just like the CA recall was all about Davis.

Californians were so eager to get rid of Davis, they replaced him w/the kindergarten cop! :D


Ah, but Walker is no Governator. :O

purplepenquin said...

Walker will win the recall election

I've been worried that might happen.

But then I noticed that slightly over 785,000 voters turned out for the Republican Presidential Primary yesterday, while the number of verified signatures on the recall petitions against Walker was around 900,000.

*shrug*

garage mahal said...

Barrett will easily win the primary. Then Democrats will crawl over broken glass to vote for Walker out.

The Journal Sentinel finally called for Kathy Nickolaus to step down after another election debacle last night. That's a 7-20,000 Republican vote swing right there. "Oops, found some more Republican votes!"

shiloh said...

"exuberant"

Alex, please look up the definition of exuberant. TIA

Although I was kinda exuberant when kasich got his butt kicked on Ohio's Issue 2 anti-union referendum.

Larry J said...

You know, if it weren't for the Experimental Aircraft Association in Oshkosk (and maybe the Packers), I'd pretty well write off the whole state of Wisconsin as a looney bin and never set foot or spend a dime there again.

Alex said...

shiloh - the Ohio thing is all you've got.

garage mahal said...

You know, if it weren't for the Experimental Aircraft Association in Oshkosk (and maybe the Packers), I'd pretty well write off the whole state of Wisconsin as a looney bin and never set foot or spend a dime there again.

Come back in about a year. After some serious fumigation things will be back to normal.

Alex said...

garage - don't count your chickens just yet.

Alex said...

Come back in about a year. After some serious fumigation things will be back to normal.

File under "civility bullshit".

MadisonMan said...

Barrett / Falk debate

Vinehout and La Follette get no respect.

Steve Austin said...

I hope Ann understands that Falk is the designated winner of the primary.

As a member of the VRWC, many of us received our emails from Koch industries yesterday. 400,000 have been identified to vote for Falk in the Dem primary on May.

This will vault her over Barrett and get she and her handlers overconfident of their support and thus let up on advertising dollars coming in from the Dons with AFSCME and the AFL-CIO.

Then when the general comes, we will switch back to Walker.

Meade said...

garage mahal said...
"The Journal Sentinel finally called for Kathy Nickolaus to step down after another election debacle last night."

What exactly was the "debacle" last night? She didn't get vote totals posted as quickly as the Journal Sentinel would have liked.

Maybe the Journal Sentinel should step down.

MadisonMan said...

Waukesha Co Problems last night

JS Editorial

I can't disagree with the JS. It seems pretty clear that she is in over her head.

garage mahal said...

What exactly was the "debacle" last night? She didn't get vote totals posted as quickly as the Journal Sentinel would have liked.

By Wisconsin statute, results are to be posted no later than 11:59 on election night.

MadisonMan said...

Opinion piece from last year.

Losing patience.

It goes without saying that Garage needs to learn how to link ;)

Meade said...

At one point, a volunteer confronted Kathy Karalewitz, the Town of Mukwonago administrator/clerk who is challenging Nickolaus for county clerk in the fall election on the Republican ticket.

Karalewitz was among the last to bring her vote totals into the office. In the presence of a reporter, the volunteer raised the point that Karalewitz was opposing Nickolaus in the fall election and wondered why she was so much later with her results than bigger cities such as Waukesha.

Karalewitz said she had farther to travel and she had to canvass the votes before she brought them in.

While the county clerk's Twitter feed mentioned that only the Town of Mukwonago's results were missing at 11:25 p.m., Nickolaus said Wednesday that "that was not the reason I was delayed" in posting results until more than two hours later.

Meade said...

LINK

MadisonMan said...

The snafu (emphasis on N in Waukesha Co) makes me wonder: Do all counties require the vote totals to be driven to a central location? That seems like a problem to me. What if there's a blizzard on election day?

roesch/voltaire said...

Folks in Wisconsin are generally moderate and therefore they will back Barrett and not Walker, Falk will fall because of various factors, which I will not mention.

purplepenquin said...

There are also reports that at least one polling place in Waukesha County was demanding to see an ID before allowing people to vote.

Even if you're in support of the proposed Voter ID law, ya have to agree that this ain't a proper thing to do...no?

At the very least it shows a terrible lapse in training, and worst case scenerio...well, I ain't gonna go there.

Meade said...

"Folks in Wisconsin are generally moderate and therefore they will back Barrett and not Walker, Falk will fall because of various factors, which I will not mention."

But what if the same number of Republicans cross over and vote for Falk in the primary as Democrats who crossed over and voted for Santorum yesterday?

Petunia said...

Give the Waukesha County "found votes" crap a rest, Garage, that was completely disproven.

Kind of agree with you about the EAA and the Packers, Larry J.

However, I was at Oshkosh last year when the Governor was introduced to open the airshow. Big round of applause and no booing that I could hear.

The best way to fumigate the state would be to pick up Dane County and move it to Illinois.

traditionalguy said...

Frankly my dear, we don't give a damn.

garage mahal said...

Give the Waukesha County "found votes" crap a rest, Garage, that was completely disproven.

Maybe in your mind. I wouldn't trust her to count to 10 and record it accurately.

caseym54 said...

By Wisconsin statute, results are to be posted no later than 11:59 on election night.

That is the kind of impossible statute that nitwits write. The state official is responsible for all the local delays? Foolish, as is anyone who actually expects it to be followed.

purplepenquin said...

The state official is responsible for all the local delays?

Actually, she is a county official.

And she seems to be the only one who had problems.

And this isn't the first incident with Waukesha County.

B said...

"garage mahal said...Come back in about a year. After some serious fumigation things will be back to normal."

And what a shame that would be.

Phil 3:14 said...

I thought only Republicans fought among themselves.

Crazy, and so extreme

Richard Dolan said...

Having Falk as his opponent is further proof, if any were needed, that Scott Walker has been blessed withbheaven's mandate.

mariner said...

garage mahal,
I wouldn't trust her to count to 10 and record it accurately.

As if you would know whether or not she did.

garage mahal said...

Having Falk as his opponent is further proof, if any were needed, that Scott Walker has been blessed withbheaven's mandate.

Falk and Walker are polling dead even.

Here is more on the Waukesha fiasco

Looking at those poll printouts taped the wall I can see a country like Afghanistan laughing at our elections.

SukieTawdry said...

...I'm guessing Kathleen Falk will be Walker's opponent.

Oh, hope so. Things are starting to get a little dull up your way.

leslyn said...

Re garage Mahal's link on the Waukesha vote-counting:

Nickolaus says there is also a piece of equipment she is waiting for that would make the process much faster –a special modem that would allow the municipalities to electronically forward their totals to the main office. Right now, each municipality hand-carries the totals into the office.

A "special modem"?? What is this, some kind of new *secret* gizmo developed by the NSA? A special dedicated line to all the polling places? Do you have to wear tinfoil on your head to make it work? It's taken so long to get this "special modem"--Is she waiting for the aliens to bring it?

This is a county clerk who has to paste everything up on the wall because she doesn't hit "save" and loses 14,000 votes.

I guess if you live in Waukesha Co it won't do you much good to cry, so you might as well laugh.

leslyn said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
leslyn said...

To get back to Barrett/Falk, if you listened to the longer recording instead of the snips, you would hear Barrett say that he would not go all the way with what Walker wanted to do to unions.

He says that he would alter health insurance and retirement benefits but he would vote “no on the changes in collective bargaining”.

In Wausau April 1, Barrett reiterated that he would restore collective bargaining powers.

Anyway, competition between Barrett and Falk is a given, not a surprise. Althouse knows this. When you have two (or more) candidates vying for the same position, you're not going to have a lovefest.

FedkaTheConvict said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
FedkaTheConvict said...

I'm crossing over in the primary to vote for Kathleen Falk. She has lost every statewide race she's run it; why would anyone think the result will be different this time?

I can't wait for the ads reminding voters of Falk's role in the bungled Brittany Zimmermann murder investigation to start airing.

Curious George said...

As I've said, Barrett is going to find out what a nasty bunch Falk, the public unions, and Madison lefties are. This first salvo is nothing.

I'm not sure why Barrett's even running. The Dems almost had to put a gun to his head to run last time. He's got a nice cozy gig as Mayor.

Dan from Madison said...

"I can't wait for the ads reminding voters of Falk's role in the bungled Brittany Zimmermann murder investigation to start airing." Yes! This. This is why I am also voting for Falk. Walker will steamroller her and it will be ugly.

Kit said...

Barrett is going to find out what a nasty bunch Falk, the public unions, and Madison lefties are.

The nastiness, yes, but there's a lot of us not lining up behind Falk. The union higher-ups seem intent on leading from the front. They're going to find their old ways of doing things have passed them by. Falk's getting out of the primary.

The longer (unedited) version of the interview is here. Barrett's sounding pretty reasonable.

James said...

>>garage mahal said...

Barrett will easily win the primary. Then Democrats will crawl over broken glass to vote for Walker out.<<


I'm fairly sure that a few weeks ago you were supporting Kathleen Falk. What happened?

Jay said...

garage mahal said...
Barrett will easily win the primary. Then Democrats will crawl over broken glass to vote for Walker out.


So the Democrats want the guy who used Walker's budget reforms to save his city over $20 million?

Nice to know!

Jay said...

purplepenquin said...
There are also reports that at least one polling place in Waukesha County was demanding to see an ID before allowing people to vote.


Um, that really isn't a good summary of the story.

But you carry on with your propaganda.

Rusty said...

Larry J said...
You know, if it weren't for the Experimental Aircraft Association in Oshkosk (and maybe the Packers), I'd pretty well write off the whole state of Wisconsin as a looney bin and never set foot or spend a dime there again.



It's become just a state you drive through to get to someplace more interesting.

purplepenquin said...

Um, that really isn't a good summary of the story.

But you carry on with your propaganda


Uhm, you could always write your own summary if you wanna.

But you carry on with your poo-flinging.



Seriously...it is a fact that despite the law saying they couldn't do so, a polling station was demanding an ID from voters.

Are you really gonna condone that type of behavior?

leslyn said...

Ya know, all you out-staties who turn up your noses at us don't have to come here with your arrogant, nasty ways. We can do without you. There are an awful lot of outstaties who come to Wisconsin because we're nice people and so are they, and they like that.

Are y'all from Illinois? Because that sure sounds like Northern Illinois-speak. Are you aware that the rest of your state apologizes for your behavior when they come here?

Probably not. And probably couldn't care less. See, that's what I'm talkin' about.

Calypso Facto said...

Barrett's biggest problem with Act 10 was that it didn't go far enough, because it excluded cops and firefighters who are a big cost in Barrett's City of Milwaukee budget. Can't wait to try that out as a platform plank: "I see your Act 10 and raise you to include public safety workers!"

Jay said...

purplepenquin said...


Seriously...it is a fact that despite the law saying they couldn't do so, a polling station was demanding an ID from voters.


Hey stupid:
It wasn't "voters" it was 1 (allegedly) person.

And it had nothing to do with the voter ID law as the confusion was over whether or not said voter was registered.

Note from the article:
The woman said they were asked to step aside while a poll worker contacted the city clerk to double check

You're an idiot.

Jay said...

Uhm, you could always write your own summary if you wanna.


Er, the "summary" is:

The link didn't say what you claim it did.

That is either because:
A) You're a propagandist
B) You're incapable of reading comprehension
C) Both A&B

Summary complete.

Curious George said...

purplepenquin said...
Uhm, you could always write your own summary if you wanna.

But you carry on with your poo-flinging.



Seriously...it is a fact that despite the law saying they couldn't do so, a polling station was demanding an ID from voters.

Are you really gonna condone that type of behavior?"

Two people were asked for ID. Two. They were asked to wait will the poll worker checked to see f it was a requirement. Instead they left. One came back and voted, the other didn't. The poll worker was said to "apologetic" Condone? It was clearly a mistake.

Your statement "There are also reports that at least one polling place in Waukesha County was demanding to see an ID before allowing people to vote." followed by "a polling station was demanding an ID from voters" is pure bullshit. Typical penguin. I would like to think this is a trend simply because you are stupid...but nobody is that stupid. You're just a dishonest.

Original Mike said...

"Barrett will easily win the primary."

I'm voting for Falk.

purplepenquin said...

It wasn't "voters" it was 1 (allegedly) person

I'm gonna wait to see if CurioGeo calls you a "liar", says it is "pure bullshit" and cusses you out for making this statement. ('cause even he knows it was more than one person.)

LOL! Who am I kidding?! That ain't gonna happen. Just like you ain't gonna call him names for saying there was more than one.

And it had nothing to do with the voter ID law as the confusion was over whether or not said voter was registered

You didn't actually read the news report, did you? 'cause it clearly states in the opening paragraph "...a poll worker who asked to see a photo ID"

And ya really don't see anything wrong with what that pollworker did, and instead I am wrong for pointing out it happened?

*rolls eyes*

Seriously, how would you feel if you...or one of your family members...was denied the right to vote by a pollworker? Even if it was just a "mistake", would you really not only just shrug it off but also cuss-out anyone who dares to point out it happened?

Really?!

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

I'm voting for Falk.

You're taking a pass on Captain Craptacular? Wisconsin's own one-man environmental disaster? What if Tom throws in a multi-million dollar streetcar boondoggle? Feel any better about him now?

purplepenquin said...

Crossing over to vote for Falk? What happened to the idea of writing in Walker in the DemPrimary? I know a lot of folks were pushing for that...

That aside, while I know the odds are long (next to impossible), it would be really funny if so many Repubs and Dems each crossed over in the primary that the general election ended up being Kathleen Falk vs. Arthur Kohl-Riggs.

leslyn said...

Governor Scott Walker was seen slipping into a side door at the Federal Building in Milwaukee on Tuesday. Wonder what his official calendar said he was doing at 9 a.m. that day?

I feel a *song* coming on....

Sofa King said...

And it had nothing to do with the voter ID law as the confusion was over whether or not said voter was registered

You didn't actually read the news report, did you? 'cause it clearly states in the opening paragraph "...a poll worker who asked to see a photo ID"



There are other reasons to request ID, such as to register, as has already been pointed out to you.

This actually happened to me last year. Despite having voted in the last presidential election at the same location, I was not listed on the voter rolls and they had no record of my registration. I had the option of either filling out a provisional ballot and trusting them to sort it out later, or registering AGAIN at the polls to cast a normal ballot, which - in accordance with the law - required me to show a valid photo ID.

Contrary to your expectation, though I was slightly vexed at the waste of my time, I endeavored to be understanding that paperwork can be unreliable, bookkeeping mistakes can happen, and that it would do no good at all to get huffy and obstreperous with the poll workers. I suppose I acted wrongly, in your opinion, since I did not make a scene or cause a fuss, but simply presented my ID and got on with things, but it worked out okay for me.

Jay said...

You didn't actually read the news report, did you? 'cause it clearly states in the opening paragraph "...a poll worker who asked to see a photo ID"



Stupid:
I never disputed that someone was asked for an ID. What I disputed was that they were asked for an ID because of the voter ID law.

I know reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, but do try and pay attention.

And ya really don't see anything wrong with what that pollworker did, and instead I am wrong for pointing out it happened?


Um, dipshit, I pointed out from the get-go that you're an idiot for claiming the article said something it did not.

To wit:

Seriously, how would you feel if you...or one of your family members...was denied the right to vote by a pollworker?


Except nobody was "denied the right to vote" at all.

From the article:

She called the voter help line at the Government Accountability Board and was told to go back and vote and call if they had any more trouble

And of course she voted. And the other lady who went to bed could have voted too.

Again, you're just an idiot here beclwoning himself.

Jay said...

There are other reasons to request ID, such as to register, as has already been pointed out to you.


ZOMG!!!!!!!

No way!!!!

The story said ID was asked for

and
and

and

DURRRR

YEah!

purplepenquin said...

I was not listed on the voter rolls and they had no record of my registration

Did you also not bother to read the actual story? 'cause the two women saw their names on the registered voters list. The executive director of the Government Accountability Board stated "I can't think of any reason ID would have been required."


And who (other than you) said anything about making a scene at the polling station? The fact that you have to build that strawman speaks volumes...

Jay said...

purplepenquin said...
Did you also not bother to read the actual story? 'cause the two women saw their names on the registered voters list.


Dum-Dum:

You left this part out:
"We were listed on their friggin' poll list," she said, "and yet we had our names highlighted." The poll worker said maybe they didn't register in time,

Um, that isn't what you said.

Note: you keep accusing others of "not reading the story"
Yet I'm quoting the story and you're posting idiotic lies.

Funny that, huh?

purplepenquin said...

What I disputed was that they were asked for an ID because of the voter ID law.

I didn't say that they were asked for the ID because of the voter ID law.

(Is there where I'm supposed to make some sort of personal insult against you? I keep forgetting the rules you game-players go by...)

Jay said...

. The executive director of the Government Accountability Board stated "I can't think of any reason ID would have been required."


Um, and then what?

Oh, people don't make mistakes?

The sixty year old woman isn't confused?

Note:
Asked to confirm and explain the incident Tuesday night, Waukesha City Clerk Tom Neill emailed an emphatic, "Not true, my wife is (poll) chair!"



But of course you can't believe that.

Look, idiot. You've been exposed, quite while you're behind.

Sofa King said...

I didn't say that they were asked for the ID because of the voter ID law.



You're being weirdly argumentative. If you're not saying that, then why did you respond to this:
And it had nothing to do with the voter ID law as the confusion was over whether or not said voter was registered

with this:

You didn't actually read the news report, did you? 'cause it clearly states in the opening paragraph "...a poll worker who asked to see a photo ID"


But now you're definitely NOT disputing the former? What point were you trying to make with the latter?

???

purplepenquin said...

people don't make mistakes?

Sometimes people do, which is why I clearly said it might have been due to a lapse in training.

But of course you can't believe that.

I can totally beleive that would be his first response, and I don't even hold it against him for thinking it would be unbeleivable to him that his own wife would do such a thing.

But the statement in the story right after the one you quoted shows there may be a bit more to this story.

purplepenquin said...

One of the things I like about forums is learning more about how some people think differently than I do.

For example, these type of remarks:

You're an idiot. You're just an idiot. DURRRR YEah! Dum-Dum Look, idiot.

Some people honestly think that is how adults should talk to each other and there is nothing wrong with behaving as such, while I think that the constant name-calling shows a desire to destroy the actual conversation and those people are simply wanting the thread to turn into nothing more than a flame-war.

leslyn said...

AAARRGGHH! Stop the madness!

leslyn said...

Alex said...

shiloh -the Ohio thing is all you've got.

4/4/12 6:51 P.M.

Nope. Indiana too.

Alex said...

You mean this:

Indiana becomes 23rd "right-to-work" state

Oops, doesn't fit the narrative...

leslyn said...

Inspired by the actions of Democratic legislators in Wisconsin and the protests here against the elimination of collective bargaining rights, the minority Indiana Democratic legislators fled their state on February 22, 2011. They did not reurn until March 28, 2011, after a negotiated agreement with their counterparts across the aisle.

The agreement provided that three of twelve bills introduced by the Republican majority would be withdrawn. Among those withdrawn was the bill that sparked the walkout, a right to work bill in the Indiana House of Representatives. The bill would have made it illegal for employees to be required to join a workers union.

But Alex, you're right, Indiana did it anyway.

....I guess you can't believe the promises of Republican politicians.

Alex said...

leslyn - don't sound so butthurt, it's unbecoming.

leslyn said...

OK. You can't believe the promises of INDIANA Republican politicians.

Jay said...

purplepenquin said...


But the statement in the story right after the one you quoted shows there may be a bit more to this story.


Right.

And the story is not, and never was, "they were asked to show ID in order to vote"

Which is what started with.

See, the whole issue around the ID was because there was a question on if they were registered.

Not in order to vote.

See the difference?

purplepenquin said...

And the story is not, and never was, "they were asked to show ID in order to vote"

The words "in order to vote" never appeared in this thread until you wrote them, so I don't know why you're putting quote marks around 'em as if it was something I said.

Actually, I do know why you're putting quotes around them. It is for the same reason you're constantly calling names. The same reason you keep making the personal attacks. You obviously have no desire to have a good faith discussion, so instead you just build these strawmen and fling poop until the thread turns into nothing more than a flame-war.

There is no longer any doubt that is your intentions. You made it very clear in your opening response to me that you wanted an argument rather than a conversation. Only question in my mind is Are you behaving as such just 'cause you're bored, or is it actually a deliberate attempt to divert attention away from the sloppiness and/or shenanigans going on in Waukesha County?

And there ain't no question something weird is going on with the elections in that county, 'cause the County Clerk just handed off those duties to her deputy.