Walker's rematch with Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett was prompted by one issue: Walker's tough stance with the state's public-employee unions. It's inconceivable that the recall election would be occurring absent that. And a disagreement over a single policy is simply not enough to justify a vote against the governor....
Democrats claim the recall election is about far more than Act 10....
But the Journal Sentinel doesn't think much of the effort to trump up other issues. And the Journal Sentinel thinks Walker is the better leader:
... Walker has helped to right the state's finances with a minimum of gimmicks - the governor reported recently that the state may be able to book a $154 million surplus next year...Meanwhile, his challenger, Milwaukee mayor Tom Barrett "can be tentative and slow to act."
While building consensus is admirable - the opposite of the approach Walker often takes - the mayor can be risk-averse to a fault. One example: He has been slow to articulate a vision for economic development in the city and to develop a strategic economic plan for Milwaukee that dovetails with regional efforts.People who couldn't wait for the next election have made the state dump $18 million into the recall. Ironically, their candidate is a man who is tentative and slow to act.
... But this election isn't about Tom Barrett. It's about Scott Walker.
Even if you disagree with Walker's policies, does that justify cutting short his term as governor? And if so, where does such logic lead? To more recall elections? More turmoil?