WALKER: People have seen no matter how many attack ads from the big government union bosses, the bottom line is the reforms are working.Walker is going to argue the facts, the results.
RUSH: And so they're living the reforms that you've made, they're actually demonstrable.
WALKER: Yeah, we have a great choice here. We don't even know who the candidate is against us yet other than we know the real opponent will be this money coming in from out of state from these government unions, but in the end it's a real choice. You can go back to the days of double-digit tax increases, billion-dollar budget deficits, and record job loss, because in the three years before I took office Wisconsin lost 150,000 private sector jobs, or we can move forward and ultimately be in a position where we can move the state forward. We've had a net increase of jobs this year. We balanced the budget without tax increases. We did it the old-fashioned way. We made structural changes that think more about the next generation than just about the next election. And we were able to protect core services by making these reforms. That's where I think the majority of people in our state want to go... I think the facts, if given a chance to get out, will ultimately allow us to yet again earn the trust of a majority of people in our state.
January 17, 2012
On the day Democrats file 1 million recall signatures, Governor Scott Walker does an interview with Rush Limbaugh.
We're already discussing the filed petitions here, so this post is about the interview. Here's the transcript, which reveals what I think will be Walker's central theme in the recall campaign:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
118 comments:
He can't do that. It's not fair.
That means all the Lefties have are the usual lies, smears and strong arm tactics.
I wonder how many listeners Rush Limbaugh has in Wisconsin? 800,000? A million? 1.9 million?
Is this number known?
"the facts"
If it's a fact that the real opponent is out of state dough, from unions.
Presumably the solution is out of state dough from folks who want to bust unions. Such as Rush's audience and the other folks Walker was shaking down today.
BTW, why is Walker describing the terrible situation he inherited? Doesn't he know that cons don't like it when BHO does that? Shame.
PBJ,
The primary difference is that he is describing the situation that he faced and not using using it as an excuse.
Have we really had a net increase in jobs? (i honestly dont know but was under the impression we have lost jobs)
"We made structural changes that think more about the next generation than just about the next election"
I've got a non-electioneering idea that will help future generations. How about requiring ID to vote, and then shutting down offices that provide such IDs in D districts.
folks who want to bust unions.
from BLS:
In 2010, the union membership rate--the percent of wage and salary workers who were members of a union--was 11.9 percent, down from 12.3 percent a year earlier, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. The number of wage and salary workers be-longing to unions declined by 612,000 to 14.7 million. In 1983, the first year for which comparable union data are available, the union membership rate was 20.1 per-cent, and there were 17.7 million union workers.
At what point do we consider them "busted"?
BTW, why is Walker describing the terrible situation he inherited? Doesn't he know that cons don't like it when BHO does that? Shame.
I dont know...maybe to illustrate how his reforms have worked, and maybe to illustrate that if politicians actually make tough decisions to solve problems, things can get done?
" Never was so much owed by so many to so few"
Doesn't he know that cons don't like it when BHO does that?
uh, PB, you do see the difference don't you?
Hmm, Walker cut spending and balanced the budget. Obama.....now what did he do again?
Yup, we're gonna get a clear cut choice in 2012. Either WI gives it's stamp of approval to Walker's reform process or it goes back to the dark ages of fiscal insanity.
"uh, PB, you do see the difference don't you?"
Yes.
In one situation the predecessor was a lib. But BHO inherited 800,000 job losses per month from a con who cut taxes for the rich and started overseas nation building wars. That is why we can't blame the con for the disaster that occurred following his con policies because con policies create growth, not disaster. And, the fact that BHO's election has resulted in a job market that is creating one million more jobs per month, relative to what he inherited, is irrelevant.
Facts, results.
"Walker is going to argue the facts, the results."
In the liberal mind, facts that they don't like = hate.
The meme machine is in high gear.
It is amusing to point out to liberals that the results actually favor them too - at least the ones that don't benefit from membership in a public union.
Silly liberals.
Hmmm...Walker's explaining how his actions have improved and continue to improve the situation in Wisconsin.
Obama is still blaming Bush, as the economy continues to tank and our foreign policy is in shreds, and it's almost three years since he took over.
Yeah, no difference there at all.
Arguing the facts sounds like saying the trains run on time.
"And, the fact that BHO's election has resulted in a job market that is creating one million more jobs per month, relative to what he inherited, is irrelevant."
Hilarity ensues...
Just go ahead and shut down your computer now pbj.
You are an idiot.
Here's a standard we can apply to everyone..."by their fruits ye shall now them." Or, as RR said "are you better off?"
People aren't stupid, unless they're straining to prove an unprovable point.
Walker is going to argue the facts, the results.
The other side is going to argue the law and it's own interpretation of it.
Althouse is going to play the role impartial justice.
The people of Wisconsin are going to decide.
know
Walker has been raising out of state money (he's in NYC doing that tonight, I believe), so decrying it as somehow untoward is laughable. Besides, it doesn't matter how much is raised out of state, those million-plus signatures were from Wisconsin. It's highly unlikely that there will be 500,000 Mikey Mouse signatures, as Rush seems to believe.
Compare and contrast: Every other governor of Illinois ends up in jail yet Walker is only the third governor to face a recall simply because the opposing party really, really doesn't like him.
This post really is embarrassing for Althouse. I can't think of another that was more so.
What happened to the astute observer Althouse?
Today she comes face to face w/ a blatant con plea for dough and she mistakes it for some sort of statement of principle.
She can see the phoniness of emails that call her 'friend,' but she enthusiastically falls--hook, line and sinker--for Walker's blather.
Disappointing.
PB,
Please review...
there will be a test.
WI unemployment Jan. 2011 ~ 7.4%
WI unemployment Jan. 2011 ~ 7.3%
Wisconsin's jobs count continues to move in the wrong direction.
The state lost 11,700 private sector jobs in November, according to the monthly report issued Dec. 15, 2011 by the Department of Workforce Development.
It was the single largest monthly job loss since Republican Scott Walker took office in January 2011, and the largest since April 2009, according to state statistics.
It's also the fifth consecutive month of job losses.
Walker's top campaign promise was that the state would add 250,000 private-sector jobs before the end of his four-year term. The new report puts state private-sector employment at 2,333,508, compared with 2,317,200 when Walker took office -- an increase of 16,308 jobs. That leaves the governor with 233,692 jobs left to achieve his promise.
Three more years! Three more years!
>
As Althouse and her heartthrob Limbaugh will be doing some serious spinning the next couple mos. :-P
Dizzy
Phil,
Those estimates where made before BHO took office, i.e. before he was handed the cumulation of job loss that was quickly results from many months of job losses of approximately 750,000 jobs per month.
And, even to fine print in those estimates acknowledged that they were based on the best data at the time, before W's disaster had fully materialized at the end of 08 and the first months of 09.
You mean like the "fact" that Wisconsin public employees don't contribute enough to their pension and benefit plans?
About as "factual" as a Romney speech...or Gingrich....or Perry...or Santorum...etc...etc...
WI unemployment Nov. 2011 ~ 7.3%
Wisconsifornia Über Alles!!
zhiloh said...
WI unemployment Nov. 2011 ~ 7.3%
Thank you, Barack Hussein Obama, mm, mm, mm.
WI unemployment Nov. 2011 ~ 7.3%
Walker reduced it from 7.4 to 7.3. Obama increased his.
Obama inherited a 7.8% unemployment and now it's 8.5%
Bureau of Labor Statistics
Walker's top campaign promise was that the state would add 250,000 private-sector jobs before the end of his four-year term. The new report puts state private-sector employment at 2,333,508, compared with 2,317,200 when Walker took office -- an increase of 16,308 jobs. That leaves the governor with 233,692 jobs left to achieve his promise.
How many jobs have you created?
Walker was stupid to make specific promises about # of jobs created, but all politicians do that.
So let's recap, shall we:
Walker's campaign strategy ~ but, but, but Obama ...
Interesting conundrum, does Walker try to string the recall election process out, risking further voter resentment and potentially more negative unemployment figures or go for a quick recall election.
Stay tuned.
I'm just stating what his theme is: the results of the new policy. The Dems can either counterargue about what the facts are/mean or they can talk about general principles or something else.
Alex,
That's apples and oranges because Walker is cashing in on the Obama job creation that is affecting the entire country.
WI should be compared to other states so that we can isolate how WI compares when it's broken out of the bigger BHO picture.
The country has gone from 9% to 8.5% during the Walker reign. That is a reduction of a half a percent for the country as a whole. WI is lagging the country as a whole. What Walker policy screw-ups have resulted in WI falling so far behind the rest of the country?
Facts, results.
[General disclaimer: Yes, I do realize that it is stupid to directly attach all job creation (and destruction) to politicians. Please don't take my contributions to this thread too earnestly. I'm only playing along because some cons seem to think that such direct attachments are reasonable, but only if they help the con cause.]
Wait, Obama inherited a huge deficit/debt...and made it worse. Walker inherited the same, and made it better.
PB&J, the usefulness of comparing your achievements to your predecessor is to show how you've improved the situation. BHO exacerbated the largest problem facing our economy (and Wisconsin's), while Walker corrected the only thing he has direct control over.
These are very basic differences that should be readily apparent to even the casual observer.
"[General disclaimer: Yes, I do realize that it is stupid to directly attach all job creation (and destruction) to politicians. Please don't take my contributions to this thread too earnestly. I'm only playing along because some cons seem to think that such direct attachments are reasonable, but only if they help the con cause.]"
[General disclaimer: some people have nothing of substance to add, so they take a flamethrower to strawmen.]
"I'm just stating what his theme is: the results of the new policy."
Actually, what you're really doing is being played for a sucker. The true theme of Walker's Rush and NY visits is to raise dough. He's saying things that he thinks will raise dough for his campaign.
It's a little disappointing that you can see the political nature of dough chasing when BHO calls you 'friend,' but you're completely blinded to the same effort from Walker.
No time available to Wisconsin press today to discuss historic recalls back home, but Walker has time for Limbaugh, Hank Greenburg and $2500 per plate fundraisers in Manhattan. GREAT optics.
"GREAT optics."
He must be taking lesson from His and Her Majesties.
Then again, nothing says "optics" like obtaining signatures from one in 5 people in wisconsin.
That's just an Unbelievable performance!
Just to get Wisconsin's real employment numbers out into the discussion, here they are:
Total Wisconsin private sector employment
12/2007 (Doyle) 2,467,600
annual decline until
12/2010 (Doyle) 2,318,900
compared to
11/2011 (Walker) 2,350,200
I'm not one to ascribe private sector hiring directly to a government exec, but the raw facts are that under Walker there has, so far, been a net employment gain that turned around a 4-year slide under Doyle.
How about this double standard? (and more cognitive dissonance - it's a wonder they're still sane):
The Left would agree with Obama as he asks for more than four years to show what he can do and to show that his policies work.
The Left insists that Scott Walker put himself before the voters, and run on his results, after only two.
*BLS data
GMay,
You will be surprised to learn that BHO was handed a huge deficit and debt, that was largely caused by R policies. That's a lot more new spending than BHO created.
On the revenue side, presumably you don't think that the BHO fed gov has been collecting too much of our total GDP as tax revenue, since we've been at levels much lower than we saw during the Reagan years.
Argue the facts, the results?
Ann,
The unions don't want no stinken facts.
pbAndjFellowRepublican said...
GMay,
You will be surprised to learn that BHO was handed a huge deficit and debt, that was largely caused by R policies. That's a lot more new spending than BHO created.
Yet another lie. Willie's so-called surplus was a lot of wishful thinking projected down the road.
Sorry, the Ds, as always, contributed more than their fair share.
In any case, assuming GodZero wanted to get out of said hole, the first thing he should have done was stop digging.
You will be surprised to learn that BHO was handed a huge deficit and debt, that was largely caused by R policies.
I would indeed be surprised.
Who controlled both houses of congress starting in 2006?
In which part of government do all spending bills originate?
And how can Obama claim to only inherit a deficit from a budget that he voted for and his party was instrumental in passing?
garage mahal said...
No time available to Wisconsin press today to discuss historic recalls back home, but Walker has time for Limbaugh, Hank Greenburg and $2500 per plate fundraisers in Manhattan. GREAT optics.
It's amazing that he can do all that and still not be seen as bloated, overbearing, and inflexible. Those public sector unions must have spent years honing their image to tower so over the very image of Governor of Wisconsin. I wonder, just for shits and grins, what the per annum salary difference is between Walker and the top union official in Wisconsin. Do you happen to know garage?
ed,
The WJC surpluses* were for real (Newt even takes credit for them, incl the years he wasn't in congress).
For the record, as much as anything, these surpluses were the result of cuts in military spending after the collapse of the SU. But, that doesn't change the reality of the foreign nation building, tax cutting, and other W deficit creators that dwarf BHO's new spending, as is shown by the link I provided.
*Of course there was only one year where the gov more or less had a "true" surplus because they managed to (w/in a rounding error) balance the budget even w/o excluding intra-gov borrowing (aka raiding soc sec, etc).
PackerB,
Look at the link I provided. You'll see that the big new spending came from W pushed programs.
Facts, results.
Total Wisconsin private sector employment
12/2007 (Doyle) 2,467,600
annual decline until
12/2010 (Doyle) 2,318,900
compared to
11/2011 (Walker) 2,350,200
What I find amazing is whether you think the Walker record on jobs in his first year is good or bad or mediocre, the Dems are going have to convince the majority of citizens in this state that things are SO BAD that we have to recall Walker after being in office for a year and a half.
I just don't see them making that sale to anyone who's not state employee. And quite frankly there's going to be a sizable number of voters who will want to stop this recall nonsense in its tracks. They know if Walker gets recalled it will set an undesirable precedent for future elections in the state.
How will you convince the voter who says, "I don't see things as being so terrible to require a recall and Walker needs a full term to succeed or fail just like every other elected governor." That's the voter who will decide this election.
Good grief, what a stupid argument. The same stupid argument.
Almost everything that has happened regarding the federal budget over the last 20 years is meaningless compared to the deficits to come. It's noise. Sometimes tax money flooded in as profiteers cashed in their bubble profits. Sometimes tax money flooded out when the bubbles crashed.
The only important thing Walker said is this: "We made structural changes that think more about the next generation than just about the next election. And we were able to protect core services by making these reforms."
If you think this is true, vote for him. If not, not.
Can Obama say the same thing? If so, how? What structural changes has Obama made that will protect core services down the road? Be specific.
"I don't see things as being so terrible to require a recall and Walker needs a full term to succeed or fail just like every other elected governor."
Speaking as that voter, I'll say it would depend on the Democrat running. Walker has some weaknesses that some Democrats might be able to exploit.
I do agree, though, that in general it's a bad idea to recall a Gov just because he passes a law that you disagree with. Recalls should be reserved for criminals. I voted against Walker two Novembers ago. I wasn't thrilled that he won, but I wasn't surprised either. I don't expect the candidate I support to win every time, and you just wait the one you don't like out. The pendulum in politics swings both ways.
"They know if Walker gets recalled it will set an undesirable precedent for future elections in the state."
>
"I do agree, though, that in general it's a bad idea to recall a Gov just because he passes a law that you disagree with."
>
Undesirable precedent being that Walker didn't campaign on union busting, but once elected seemed like that was his goal all along. As w/many of the new Rep govs, of course, didn't work so well for Kasich.
So, if Walker ran on union busting and still got elected he probably wouldn't be recalled. Truth in advertising, so to speak.
Indeed, you don't expect the opposition party to pass much of anything you agree with, but you expect them to be truthful.
>
ok, ok, a politician telling the truth ~ surely a bridge too far!
Shiloh, you may want to go to WEAC and other union web sites, Milwaukee JS also. Check out the fall of 2010. Governor Scott Walker said exactly what he was going to do and the union thugs knew it.
Undesirable precedent being that Walker didn't campaign on union busting, but once elected seemed like that was his goal all along. As w/many of the new Rep govs, of course, didn't work so well for Kasich.
Check out the campaign ads that were run against Walker in which it was claimed that he was going to do the things that he later did.
So, I want to understand your position. Are you saying that the unions lied in the campaign, attributing to Walker positions he didn't take during the campaign?
Or were they accurate about Walker's position, but people voted for Walker anyway?
That's pretty thin gruel to base a recall on, but you know, now that there's gonna be a recall, that's one of things you gonna have to convince voters about.
"Walker lied when he did the things we accused him of intending to do"
Yeah, that'll be catchy and convincing.
Speaking as that voter, I'll say it would depend on the Democrat running. Walker has some weaknesses that some Democrats might be able to exploit.
I think the independent voter is going to look at this a little differently because it's a recall. Recall's rarely succeed because there's a deep-seeded bias against suspending a duly-elected official's term in office without just cause. Many voters, who may be persuaded in a general election to vote against Scott Walker, will still vote for him because they'll feel this whole situation lacks fundamental fairness. And they won't want to reward Walker-haters for a 16-month temper tantrum that has cost the state millions of dollars.
Californians recall their governor because he led them to budget deficits. Wisconsinites recall their governor because he led them to a balanced budget. Huh?
You will be surprised to learn that BHO was handed a huge deficit and debt, that was largely caused by R policies. That's a lot more new spending than BHO created.
Actually, no. The budget deficit didn't really start exploding until the Dems retook Congress in 2006. What you are talking about are the results of the actions of the 110th Congress, with Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi at the helm. Of course, the deficit then more than doubled when the Dems also took the Presidency in 2008.
And never forget that a good part of the reason that the home loan market imploded was that Fannie and Freddie, under pressure from esp. Barney Frank, were taking most of the subprime loans by early 2008 - loans destined to failure since they were, by definition, given to people with little hope of repaying them, all so that home ownership was more fairly distributed. So much for fairness - home ownership has crashed since then. If I remember right, that alone was most of a trillion dollars of Obama's debt. And, yes, both Fannie and Freddie had been run for years as a sinecure for Dem pols.
pbAndjFellowRepublican said...
ed,
The WJC surpluses* were for real (Newt even takes credit for them, incl the years he wasn't in congress).
No, they weren't.
The OMB charts are very clear on that point. No surplus, ever.
And most of the regulars here know it.
Go over to Kos or DU. They still lap it up.
"But BHO inherited 800,000 job losses per month from a con who cut taxes for the rich and started overseas nation building wars."
-- Libya and the still existing Bush tax cuts say 'ello guvner.
"And, the fact that BHO's election has resulted in a job market that is creating one million more jobs per month, relative to what he inherited, is irrelevant."
-- One did not necessarily lead to the other.
If an independent, objective, audit of the signatures can be made-(silly me)- I wonder what percentage will be found to be fake and or fraudulent.
After all it is Madison and vote stealing is how the democrats/proggs roll.
Speaking as that voter, I'll say it would depend on the Democrat running.
Madman is still clinging to his fantasy that there is some Democrat that can fool the rubes into thinking he is pro-business. However, at this point, they've all cast their lots with the unions. Just yesterday the right-wing rag Cap Times was reporting how the unions were behind closed doors picking the Democrat candidate.
BTW, why is Walker describing the terrible situation he inherited? Doesn't he know that cons don't like it when BHO does that
Fail.
BHO whines about the situation he inherited.
He doesn't describe it at all.
pbAndjFellowRepublican said...
In one situation the predecessor was a lib. But BHO inherited 800,000 job losses per month
Hysterical.
He inherited no such thing. You can present no data supporting this idiotic assertion.
pbAndjFellowRepublican said...
This post really is embarrassing for Althouse.
You're the one typing outright lies and silly bromides.
A normal person would be embarrassed by this. Yet you carry on.
bAndjFellowRepublican said...
GMay,
You will be surprised to learn that BHO was handed a huge deficit and debt
When Harry & Nancy took over congress the unemployment rate was 4.6% and the federal deficit was $260 billion.
That is a fact.
that was largely caused by R policies.
That would be false considering that the deficit was declining before the democrats took over.
That's a lot more new spending than BHO created.
Hilarious. Obama added more debt in just over 3 years than Bush did in 2 terms. That is a fact.
Your posts are beyond parody.
Look at the link I provided. You'll see that the big new spending came from W pushed programs.
While ignoring that we spend over $800 billion a year on a program started by FDR.
You count social security, medicare and medicaid as "Democrat spending" right?
I mean since you're tallying up "Bush spending" and deficits in such a silly manner you're doing that, correct?
*GIGGLE*
You incoherent leftists never cease to amaze.
shiloh said...
So let's recap, shall we:
Walker's campaign strategy ~ but, but, but Obama ...
Um, huh?
Can you point us to a statement by Walker demonsrating this?
(Note: I can't believe I asked you that question).
"... And, the fact that BHO's election has resulted in a job market that is creating one million more jobs per month, relative to what he inherited, is irrelevant.".."
Huh? A million jobs per month?
Walker said, "We made structural changes that think more about the next generation than just about the next election."
That particular phrasing really strikes a chord with me. So much of what is going on financially on all levels of government is not sustainable. It has to be recognized and dealt with in a responsible way. WI is fortunate to have Scott Walker.
If you're going to demand a recall, isn't it a good idea to have a candidate lined up?
Look at the link I provided. You'll see that the big new spending came from W pushed programs.
Fact: federal spending on food stamps has doubled since George W. Bush left office.
And since food stamps are Democratic spending programs, we can remove them from the "Bush spending" column (along with Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Schip) and note that using your logic Bush ran surpluses.
And, the fact that BHO's election has resulted in a job market that is creating one million more jobs per month, relative to what he inherited, is irrelevant.".."
Hilarious.
Jan 2009: -598,000
Feb 2009: -651,000
Mar 2009: -663,000
Apr 2009: -539,000
May 2009: -345,000
Jun 2009: -467,000
Jul 2009: -247,000
Aug 2009: -216,000
I don't see -800,000 or -750,000 there, champ.
Oh, that's because you're a silly little liar.
Walker is lying about the net increase in jobs in Wisconsin. Through November, (the latest month for which data is available) was about flat for the year.
Of course, Althouse doesn't bother to fact check people she agrees with.
I'm just stating what his theme is: the results of the new policy
So you don't care if he is lying about his achievements or not? It is up to Democrats to point out his lies?
What happened to "cruel neutrality"?
So, a completely new and unfunded entitlement liability (Medicare Part "D")and 2 wars fought on borrowed money have nothing to do with the current debt situation?
Wow...nice alternative reality you have in here...
machine said...
So, a completely new and unfunded entitlement liability (Medicare Part "D")and 2 wars fought on borrowed money have nothing to do with the current debt situation?
Um, who said that again?
Freder Frederson said...
Walker is lying about the net increase in jobs in Wisconsin
No, no he is not.
about flat
Hilarious.
Actually, there was an increase.
Walker said there was an increase.
You continue to make an utter fool of yourself.
and 2 wars fought on borrowed money
I love that.
You know what else is funded on "borrowed money"?
The EPA, The Departments of Health & Human Services, Commerce, Education, Medicare, Head Start, the FDA, SCHIP, "income security" programs, and countless others.
You're busy pointing out that they're "unfunded" right?
‘ At what point do we consider them [unions] "busted"? ‘
When 98 percent of union members work for employers who are not subject to competition (e.g. government, regulated monopolies, etc.)?
Because, by far the biggest union-buster is market competition. Which is why the threat of public-sector unionism is not just the higher cost and lower quality of a union-protected workforce, but in the relentless pressure to increase the size of the public sector.
If unions ever learn how to add value and not just cost to labor then they'll be worthy of public support and legal protection. Until then, attempts to fix the price of labor are no more legitimate than attempts by business to fix the prices of the goods and services it offers. Especially in the public sector, where market discipline is absent.
If you're going to demand a recall, isn't it a good idea to have a candidate lined up?
Yes. But incumbents always do worse against generic competition vs. a specific person.
Add in the fact that politicians are cowards who would rather cut spending on a donor's pet project than face voters.
Actually, there was an increase.
Actually, if you are taking Walker literally, there was a slight drop in jobs based on the available data--a net drop in jobs Jan--Nov (the last month for which data is available). Even if you give him the benefit of the doubt and give him a full year, there still is a net loss of jobs (you would have to use Apr 2011 as a baseline to find a net gain in jobs in 2011).
Follow the link I provided and then come back and explain the numbers to me.
Freder Frederson said...
Actually, if you are taking Walker literally, there was a slight drop in jobs based on the available data--a net drop in jobs Jan--Nov
No, no there was not.
Unless you count going from 225,983unemployed to 223,833 unemployed as a "net drop"
Idiot.
you would have to use Apr 2011 as a baseline to find a net gain in jobs in 2011
Hysterical.
Or, you can go to the BLS and see that from Jan 2011 to Nov 2011 the unemployement rate dropped.
Which of course is why you don't want to do that.
You are a terribly bad liar.
The Dems are not going to mention collective bargaining at all in the campaign.....because everyone knows the results worked. Every lefty on a school board and city council knows the reforms worked.
So as we have seen in countless threads on this blog....the Dems are going to focus on JOBS, which is smart because Walker opened himself up to that line of attack.
So what will be the concrete plan by the yet-to-be-named Dem candidate regarding jobs?
The Walker Camp is in full spin mode today. "Madison Libruls"! UNION Bosses!"
I'm struck how dumb he thinks his supporters are. Or, maybe he knows they are that dumb.
Speaking of facts where is the link to show me all the outside state union money flowing in? I can find evidence of all the outside funding flowing in for Walker as he makes his usual claims. Given that a million folks signed the petition thanks to a grass roots effort, I think the re-call will be close and will depend on how folks assess the Walker effect in their life. Employment has not risen significantly, property taxes are down because housing prices have dropped, and up-state schools are now talking about dropping classes and increasing class sizes-- even the fabled Waukesha School District finds itself fighting to save the music program and its bands. While Walker has earned the trust of Althouse and Meade, many of us, myself included, are not convinced.
A millionbillion signatures is a lot of signatures.
garage mahal said...
The Walker Camp is in full spin mode today. "Madison Libruls"! UNION Bosses!"
I'm struck how dumb he thinks his supporters are. Or, maybe he knows they are that dumb.
Coming from someone who believes that by recalling Walker he supports "the middle class" no less.
A million Wisconsinites want to change governors immediately and get rid of the ALEC/Club for Growth cocktail jammed down their throats, Jaytard. Chew on that for a while.
"property taxes are down because housing prices have dropped,"
My property taxes are down because the city/school etc reduced their levy. House values having nothing to do with the levy (total amount gathered by the government entity).
My property value has gone down....but the assessed value placed on it by government has remained unchanged. My taxes are based on the assessed value, not current value.
People a few blocks away in Milwaukee in the same type of house as mine pay the same dollar amount in prop taxes. Their houses are worth significantly less because no middle class family with kids wants to live in Milwaukee but the mil rate they pay is much higher.
The only true overall measure of an overall property tax hike or decrease is the property tax levy.
garage mahal said...
A million Wisconsinites want to change governors immediately
It is so cute when you pretend a million different people signed those petitons.
Really, its touching.
PS, even assuming the 1 million figure to be true, Wisconsin’s voting-age population currently stands at around 4.3 million people, meaning less than 25 percent of eligible citizens signed a recall petition.
Still waiting on that concrete jobs plan that will be pushed by the Dems?
It is so cute when you pretend a million different people signed those petitons.
You're going to have to come to terms with this sooner or later. Holding out hope that a bunch of Hitlers signed is pretty pathetic.
A few random thoughts from the ground:
1.My property taxes went down under Walker. They never did under Doyle.
2.Wisconsin's structural budget deficit got fixed.
3.Many local unions rushed to get their last gasp contracts signed before the budget repair bill took effect (see Senate Democrats fleeing the state and lawsuits delaying in order to get these contracts ratified). Once these contracts expire, the fiscal benefits to state and local government are really going to be felt.
4.Private sector job growth in Wisconsin has been retarded by the uncertainty generated by the recall climate.
5.Anybody who thinks out of state union money is not coming into Wisconsin is delusional. There just aren't that many Wisconsinites who walk around wearing Bears, Lions, Flyers, Bruins, White Sox etc. garb!
5. Yeah, there is going to be a lot of out of state money coming into Wisconsin to support Walker, but it would not have been coming here if the Dems hadn't decided to recall. I would call it evening the playing field.
garage mahal said...
You're going to have to come to terms with this sooner or later
Um, no, no I'm not because it didn't happen.
Signing multiple times was an acceptable part of the process.
Freder Frederson said...
Walker is lying about the net increase in jobs in Wisconsin. Through November, (the latest month for which data is available) was about flat for the year.
And you're going to recall him for THAT?
If that's your argument to convince people who are not public employees or died-in-wool Scott Walker haters to kick him out after a year in office, well, good luck to you.
Me. I'll make some popcorn and enjoy the spectacle of your side flailing around trying to find the ultimate catastrophy that you were saying was going to happen and hasn't.
Um, no, no I'm not because it didn't happen.
LOL
Can garage or one of the other recall sturmabteilung esplain why you'd go through this whole recall thing and not even have a candidate to challenge Walker?
Cause otherwise the whole effort seemed like a bigger temper tantrum.
And, the fact that BHO's election has resulted in a job market that is creating one million more jobs per month, relative to what he inherited, is irrelevant.
Of course, this is why unemployment has increased right? And that labor participation rate is the lowest it's been in decades? All that job growth increases unemployment and decreases job participation? Ha! pbj, you're hilarious.
The contortion O supporters have to go through to say how much better the blue model is compared to the red despite the fact that O has destroyed the job market, all states dedicated to the blue state model are failing (with the bluest of the blue, NY, CA, MI, actually failed states), whereas states following the red state model actually has, you know, economic success (with TX responsible for most of the job creation in the entire country).
garage mahal said...
A million Wisconsinites want to change governors immediately
My money is on 20% being fraudulent, but then I'm an optimist.
And you're going to recall him for THAT?
I don't live in Wisconsin, so I am not going to recall him for anything. My point is that Althouse doesn't seem to care about the truth value of Walker's statement, which as Jay so helpfully points out, is technically correct--Walker has managed to create a whopping 2150 jobs (an incredible .95% decrease in the unemployment rate) in 2011.
Kathleen Falk sent an email to supporters announcing her decision to run against Walker...so says a little blurb in the local on-line newspaper.
"... garage mahal said... A million Wisconsinites want to change governors immediately.."
You'd think there would be a viable candidate in the one million.
PS, even assuming the 1 million figure to be true, Wisconsin’s voting-age population currently stands at around 4.3 million people, meaning less than 25 percent of eligible citizens signed a recall petition.
About 2.1 million people voted in the 2010 election.
Freder - how many private sector jobs would a Democrat have created?
My point is that Althouse doesn't seem to care about the truth value of Walker's statement, which as Jay so helpfully points out, is technically correct
Comcial.
Actually, you don't care about the truth regarding the statement which is why you rushed to the Internet and beclowned yourself by proclaiming it a "Lie"!
Of course you've convinced yourself that truth value is some legitimate term and justifies your silliness.
"... how many private sector jobs would a Democrat have created?.."
Billions.
About 2.1 million people voted in the 2010 election.
*GIGGLE* Comical! Hilarious! Beclown!
THIS DID NOT HAPPEN! *shaking fist*
/Jay
garage mahal said...
About 2.1 million people voted in the 2010 election.
*GIGGLE* Comical! Hilarious! Beclown!
THIS DID NOT HAPPEN! *shaking fist*
Huh?
I love the fact that you can't distinguish between tabulated election results and unverified signatures.
Why, it is almost as if you're an idiot or something.
Again, you beclown yourself here daily but you'll be back tomorrow.
IT'S ALL A LIE!
If he is going to run on job creation (again) it's not too impressive to compare the very small increase in jobs during his tenure to the job situation over three years spanning the worst economic disaster since the Great Depression. During the 2010 campaign e pledged 250,000 new jobs for Wisconsin. Democrats are going to compare his performance to that.
"Walker's campaign strategy ~ but, but, but Obama"
"Um, huh?
Can you point us to a statement by Walker demonsrating this?"
>
No Jay, I was referring to the whining er conservative posts in this thread.
hmm, what's Jay's usual reply ...
Idiot!
>
btw Jay, (6) posts in a row! Pace yourself, little buddy.
No Jay, I was referring to the whining er conservative posts in this thread.
Actually, you weren't.
But keep telling yourself that.
BTW, why is Walker describing the terrible situation he inherited? Doesn't he know that cons don't like it when BHO does that? Shame.
1/17/12 7:43 PM
Hmm, Walker cut spending and balanced the budget. Obama.....now what did he do again?
1/17/12 8:04 PM
Thank you, Barack Hussein Obama, mm, mm, mm.
1/17/12 8:58 PM
Walker reduced it from 7.4 to 7.3. Obama increased his.
1/17/12 8:58 PM
Obama inherited a 7.8% unemployment and now it's 8.5%
1/17/12 9:01 PM
~~~~~
"So let's recap, shall we:
Walker's campaign strategy ~ but, but, but Obama ...
1/17/12 9:11 PM"
>
Believe what you will Jay, as from what I've read of your ad nauseam inane blather, no one can penetrate your conservative bubble.
take care, blessings
Post a Comment