That the primaries were held at all is a function of the twists and turns of political strategy played out in recent months as the state broke into warring camps over Walker's attempt to restrict collective bargaining for public employees.You have to click here to see the percentages. Note that the "fake" candidate won at least 30% of the vote in all 6 districts, and one got 46%. Since everyone knew these were not real candidates and voting for them was a most an inarticulate cry of opposition to the recall process or a way to help out the Republican, what does it mean that these candidates did this well?
The Republican Party forced the primaries to give its six senators facing recall another four weeks before facing a Democratic challenger, in order to allow them to take their case to the voters and argue that their work on the budget was good for the state.
July 13, 2011
All 6 "fake" Democrats fall in the recall primary.
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
30 comments:
Is 30% good? Here in NC you could run a yellow dog as a Democrat in a local race and get well over 50% of the vote.
Perhaps "everyone" is actually aware that these are "fake" Democrats, but that would surprise me. My (brilliant) wife pays attention to politics on a 2 year cycle, and that does not include special elections. If she weren't a Democrat I'd print out the ballot list and drive her to the polling place on election day.
-XC
Our local papers and tv news have headlined the fact that these candidates were "fake" day after day after day. Not sure how anyone could help but be aware.
I live in Kaukauna, the much publicized school district. The teachers are loud and agressive. My fear is they have the edge in our upcoming "real" recall next month.
If they represent dedicated republicans casting spoiler votes - and I understand that it was an open primary - then it doesn't mean much.
If the >30% numbers actually do represent votes protesting the recal itself by less than radical, less than progressive, but traditional democrats, then I would say all the recall attempts are in danger of failing.
If they represent independents casting protest votes and one is comfortable projecting that trend to the general election, then it's hugely significant.
Wow. I'm in district 10 and Drama Queen Moore got only 54% compared to the fake Democrat who mustered 46% of the vote. Had I known it was going to be that close I would have voted for Weix. I know a lot of other people who probably feel the same way.
Do the unions own Wisconsin?
We shall soon see.
It seems to indicate the weakness of the candidates (protest votes normally don't amount to more than a few percent in even the most egregious cases), but we won't know for sure until the real election.
Don't some of the Republicans face "fake" republicans in their own primaries?
The open primary may point to a final vote best case. It'll be interesting to see how R's vote when there's a clearly delineated R/D after the names.
The woman from Kaukauna knows the teachers are bullies; she is not alone, and the voting booth is a safe and secure way to fight back.
Are there going to be primaries for the Republicans?
AllenS said...
Are there going to be primaries for the Republicans?
For the Republican challengers to recall Dems? Yes. Next Tuesday. No "fake" Democrats.
Look, this was a bigger deal for the Dems. While it would be nice to have had a victory or two, the goal was to delay the recall election. The GOP has the incumbent and will put time and money into the actual election...so these percentages actually are encouraging. All grass roots. They'll be back with the rest in August.
Republican primaries are next week to decide the challengers going up against Wirch and Holperin. There will be no primary in district 30 since Nygren dropped the ball. Is VanderLeest is the dem "fake" candidate? Not labeled as such on WisPolitcs.
http://www.wispolitics.com/index.iml?Article=238683
And everyone knew that voting for the real candiates showed support for the anti-Walker position, so what does it mean that the real candidates didn't do better and what does it mean that the voter turnout wasn't that great either.
@marylynn - I think something like 13% of Americans read newspapers and less than 10% watch the local 6pm news. This number may be higher among voters, but still.
This is why special elections are so filled with partisans and political junkies.
_XC
WV = "boutes" as in: I tink you don't gots de boutes to get elected.
It means that this particular Republican gambit failed. It looks like the variability in percentages for the fake candidates could be related to Republican voter turnout, but it's not possible to say without a breakdown by voter party affiliation.
Boo-Yah!
The public gets it.
Great news.
'it's not possible to say without a breakdown by voter party affiliation.'
Exactly. If they are republicans voting in an open primary, means little or nothing. We'll find out what they mean in the smke filled backroom analysis by the reaction of the different camps in the next few days.
Overall, though, the numbers are surprising and the real challengers can't be comfortable with them.
Considering how split the state is and that this was an open primary where one can cross party lines, these numbers for the fakes are nothing to cheer about except in the one district, which will be a close run. What is surprising, based on some comments by voters in Darlings' district, is the ire of some Republicans against the Walker moves.
I think it's a bad sign for the coming recalls. If Republicans really had the support, these fake Democrats should have won (or come a lot closer).
I'm pretty upset. For a short while it seemed like we were finally moving out of the darkness. Looks like we're headed back to union control sooner or later.
It means teh Wisconsin Republican party screwed up big time by not making a serious effort to win these things. :-(
All it means is that the fix was in.
People were told ahead of time for whom to vote.
Yup, i know most people dont read papers or watch the news. Most in our community get their news from their neighbors and in the local establishments - with no effort to sort the truth from the not so true ....
Drew and gregg i hope you are wrong, but fear you could be right .... the Union folks are the ones most motivated to vote I think.
Drew said...I think it's a bad sign for the coming recalls. If Republicans really had the support, these fake Democrats should have won (or come a lot closer).
I disagree. What your missing is the financial end. Where do the incumbents facing recall put their money. Goes for both the republican or democrat defending against recall. Not my field, but logic says that the money spent on ads, flyers, debates - whatever the means used to get their position out in front - is better spent in the actual recall election, not spoiler efforts in the challengers' primary runoff.
Running a spoiler in a recall primary probably costs next to nothing for the spoiler - cost of the paperwork - but gets free exposure for the counter arguments through the media coverage and also draws down the democrat's cash needed for the general to some extent defending.
Again, these numbers should have been in the noise, not within a 30% spread and far less in some contests. Has to be a concern for the democrats.
What has me puzzeled is Fred Clark supporters say they collected over 23,000 signatures for the recall, but Clark only got 15,086 votes in the primary.
Note that the "real" candidate won at as much as 70% of the vote in all 6 districts, and even the smallest margin of victory was 54%. Since everyone knew these were the real candidates and voting for them was a very articulate statement of support for the recall process and a way to put the Republican on notice that the recall effort has teeth, what does it mean that these candidates did this well?
We've been getting a look at Moore here in Minnesota because both she and Harsdorf have been running ads on the Twin Cities television stations. Given the result, I'd say Harsdorf has to be feeling pretty good.
The key question revolves around if the primary turnout is indicative of the real recall turnout? Lets assume the fake votes are split evenly between the type of democrats that voted for Pat Buchannan in FL and pro-Republicans. Then get an adjusted Dem vote total and make some assumptions about that as a predictor of recall turnout for the Dems. Is that enough to beat the Reps in these districts?
You could run a three legged dog with mange and get 30% of the vote. It means nothing.
You could run a three legged dog with mange and get 30% of the vote.
That outcome would depend heavily on the dog's position on collective barkaining, wouldn't it?
(edited and fixed...the snark, not the dog)
What I want to know is what was the turnout.
Surprisingly high turnout in Democratic Senate primaries
The article relates turnout in the districts to the turnout in the April Supreme Court elections, which was very high. Anywhere from "more than 50% of April's turnout" to 88% of April's.
Post a Comment