especially as the unions' hand-picked candidate finished second in the primary by a fairly wide margin, and the winner of the Democratic primary had been through some contentious negotiations across the table from Milwaukee's municipal unions...since the "pro-union" slate finished second in the primary, there is no "true" pro-union candidate left running.
[aside: I assume because you put "union busting" in quotes it is because that is what Walker's opponents say he was trying to do; however, it seems clear if you look at the fine-print details of what he actually did is that he rebalanced the scales between the union and the taxpayer: the unions still have valuable services to perform on behalf of their members; Walker is merely implementing reforms aligned with FDR: the union cannot bargain over wages and benefits (it can still bargain over working conditions and disciplinary issues, I think), and the state no longer automatically collects dues from every employee on the unions' behalf.]
I think you are going overboard a bit here....if I were rich, I'd try to set up an alternative to the existing union right now, and compete with them for membership. As I said, the union still potentially has a valuable role to play and can certainly provide enough services to justify a certain level of dues collection. It seems reasonable that the state would allow employees a voluntary checkoff to pay union dues, and if the union were to stop all political advertising and pay its executives a fair salary (it appears most top-level union executives are paid more than they deliver in value; i.e. they are currently overpaid), then the dues would be substantially lower than they are now and still provide enough cash flow to make the union viable and useful.
Astute public-sector union members have known for awhile that leadership is more enamored of being political big-shots in the Democratic party and less devoted to the needs of union members themselves; yet they are afraid to speak out because of the ferocity and savagery of the intimidation (sadly, I know too much about this from first-hand experience). They no longer use physical force, there are enough procedural hoops and challenges available to them that they can make life totally miserable for anyone who stands up for what union members really want, and by making an example of those few who do say something, the rest are cowed into sullen silence, so that the 5% or 10% of misfit slackers continue to get away with stuff that no one with any integrity would want to be associated with.
Walker's reforms actually give the union members a chance to reshape the union, to "right-size" it if you will, so that it continues to remain useful, effective, and viable, by concentrating its resources on representing its members' best interests and give up being political big shots.
