Wisconsin vs Total Recall

[bronconick]

Re: Wisconsin vs Total Recall

Wisconsin to Michigan: "Don't step right here - it smells like dog shit."

What exactly were they going to recall him on? My near-retirement age parents were irate about the loss of exemption status for pensions but that's hardly enough even with boomers to get the guy out of office.

 

[unofan]

Re: Wisconsin vs Total Recall

If we were getting government services commensurate with the compensation packages (including benefits) we've been paying for, we probably wouldn't be having this conversation. The problem is that we have been *overpaying* for the services we've been getting (N.B. that overpaid != rich).

Or we could be doing the federal budget all over again on the state level. The biggest three components of the federal budget are military, social security, and medicare. So what do people want to cut? NPR, department of commerce, foreign aid funding, generic "waste", etc.

The biggest three components of most state budgets are prisons, Dept. of Human Services (essentially, medicaid, foster care, and other juvenile services), and education. So what do we target? Well, we are cutting education, especially at the community college and university levels (though, tellingly, not athletic department budgets). Prisons are definitely a growing industry though, despite "privatization" in many states.

 

[ExileOnDaytonStreet]

Re: Wisconsin vs Total Recall

Actually I've lived and worked in Wisconsin too, but not long enough to hold myself out as an expert in your class. However, a simple glance at election results over the years proves the point. Take MA as an example. There are surely conservatives there. But even you wouldn't be silly enough to suggest it's not a liberal state. There are plenty of liberals in Austin, but nobody would deny Texas is conservative (except maybe you).

Aside from the parenthetical *****iness at the end here, I won't argue. Texas and Massachusetts are without doubt what they are.

Same for Wisconsin. Why is it so important for you to deny what everybody in the room knows? Wisconin is a liberal state. Although that may be changing.

Your simple glance at election results are misleading (probably because it's a simple glance). You might see a string of elections that went to the Democrats, but you're ignoring (a) how close the votes were and (b) just how often Wisconsin has swung towards Republicans, especially for the Governorship. The fact is, Wisconsin is a swing state (a heavily divided swing state, one that's swung towards Democrats for the Presidency and Senate as of late, sure, but a swing state nonetheless). Name me one polling service that would consider Wisconsin anything but a swing state, please.

Only three times in the past thirty years has a presidential candidate won more than 50% of the vote in Wisconsin, and Reagan was one of those candidates. Aside from Obama (who ran against an opponent that had a cartoon nominated for Vice President), the only times that a Democrat won with a decisive margin here were in elections where Ross Perot was there to split the conservative vote.

In the ENTIRE HISTORY of the state, the only Gubernatorial candidates to ever win more than 60% of the vote were all Republicans, including the last two elections for four-term Republican governor Tommy Thompson (that's still in relatively recent history, mind you).

The senatorial races have admittedly swung for Democrats more than Republicans, but with few exceptions, those are rarely the kind of blowout races that George W. Bush had in the Texas Gubernatorial elections, for instance.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: Wisconsin vs Total Recall

Probably because its better governing. If the current tax system has taxpayers paying say a 3 to 1 ration for federal to state...why does the govenment need to spend in that ratio if the states can provide a large amount of services better than the federal government? Can't they figure this out?

The answer is that they can and do figure it out. Transfers happen every year. But as spending on stuff like the military continues on the federal level, the states get crowded out.



If anyone's wondering how the US worker can compete globally with the following...the answer is that it cannot:

This is the classic teachers union argument: If we spend more on education (read: compensation and benefits for teachers) our kids will be better educated. Conversely, if we spend less on education (read: compensation and benefits for teachers) our kids will get stupid. Newsflash: our kids have been getting stupid now for years.

Look what happened in Kansas City a few years ago when a federal judge took over the school system and mandated spending big chunks of money on underperforming inner city schools. So they built the natatoria, and dance studios, and green houses and all the rest. And those inner city schools are still underperforming. Although now they're underperforming with a bunch of shiney new sh*t.

 

[ExileOnDaytonStreet]

Re: Wisconsin vs Total Recall

This is the classic teachers union argument: If we spend more on education (read: compensation and benefits for teachers) our kids will be better educated. Conversely, if we spend less on education (read: compensation and benefits for teachers) our kids will get stupid. Newsflash: our kids have been getting stupid now for years.

See also: parents who treat school like it's free* day care.

* Free, other than what they pay for in taxes.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: Wisconsin vs Total Recall

Aside from the parenthetical *****iness at the end here, I won't argue. Texas and Massachusetts are without doubt what they are.

Your simple glance at election results are misleading (probably because it's a simple glance). You might see a string of elections that went to the Democrats, but you're ignoring (a) how close the votes were and (b) just how often Wisconsin has swung towards Republicans, especially for the Governorship. The fact is, Wisconsin is a swing state (a heavily divided swing state, one that's swung towards Democrats for the Presidency and Senate as of late, sure, but a swing state nonetheless). Name me one polling service that would consider Wisconsin anything but a swing state, please.

Only three times in the past thirty years has a presidential candidate won more than 50% of the vote in Wisconsin, and Reagan was one of those candidates. Aside from Obama (who ran against an opponent that had a cartoon nominated for Vice President), the only times that a Democrat won with a decisive margin here were in elections where Ross Perot was there to split the conservative vote.

In the ENTIRE HISTORY of the state, the only Gubernatorial candidates to ever win more than 60% of the vote were all Republicans, including the last two elections for four-term Republican governor Tommy Thompson (that's still in relatively recent history, mind you).

The senatorial races have admittedly swung for Democrats more than Republicans, but with few exceptions, those are rarely the kind of blowout races that George W. Bush had in the Texas Gubernatorial elections, for instance.

Margin of victory is meaningless. Our system is based on "fifty percent plus one." When a candidate wins, he wins, period. Whether it's by one point or 20. Wisconsin has favored liberal candidates over the years. Let's say since tailgunner Joe. Why is this so important to you? You're so interested in giving us lessons on civics, but haven't yet explained what difference it makes.

Certainly the Obama campaign thinks it's a swing state, now. Or they'd better. But swing isn't the same as tossup. Wisconsin is still listed as leaning Democratic. The failed temper tantrum by union goons and their Democratic allies may have exposed a fault line not easily ignored. Although you'd have to say His Oneness is the favorite in November. But this is all beside the point. Wisconsin, generally speaking, has been a liberal state for decades. Perhaps not as liberal as Massachusettes which voted for McGovern, but liberal.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: Wisconsin vs Total Recall

See also: parents who treat school like it's free* day care.

* Free, other than what they pay for in taxes.

Union hack teachers have nothing to do with the state of education in this country. Got it. There's plenty of blame to go around. But union hack teachers simply must take their share of the blame.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Wisconsin vs Total Recall

Union hack teachers have nothing to do with the state of education in this country. Got it.

Why are we bringing the #26 college into this?

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Wisconsin vs Total Recall

See also: parents who treat school like it's free* day care.

* Free, other than what they pay for in taxes.

See also: teachers who treat their job like it's babysitting.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: Wisconsin vs Total Recall

If we were getting government services commensurate with the compensation packages (including benefits) we've been paying for, we probably wouldn't be having this conversation. The problem is that we have been *overpaying* for the services we've been getting (N.B. that overpaid != rich).

In normalized decision making, you always...always...pick your priorities before you determine solutions.

Do we want a large military and little education? Let's pick the priorities first and then fix them with the appropriate funds available.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: Wisconsin vs Total Recall

In normalized decision making, you always...always...pick your priorities before you determine solutions.

Do we want a large military and little education? Let's pick the priorities first and then fix them with the appropriate funds available.

Apart from the obvious fact that that's not the "choice" we face, that argument is up to your usual standards. But knowing you, you'll repeat it several dozen more times just to make sure we "get" it. Believe me, we get it.

 

[pirate]

Without a union you don't get two extra guys on the pothole crew to lean on their shovels. Duh.

On the other hand, you could contract with a private firm to do the same work faster and for less money, but let's not cloud the issue.

I have a close friend who is on a school task force and his feedback to me was that even if they pick a non-union firm to build new schools, they have to pay union rates and the cost goes up 35%.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: Wisconsin vs Total Recall

I have a close friend who is on a school task force and his feedback to me was that even if they pick a non-union firm to build new schools, they have to pay union rates and the cost goes up 35%.

And if you have to pay union scale, why not just hire unions? Private sector unions (when they're not advocating elimination of secret ballots) are always yammering about the minimum wage. And how the young people who dominate the fast food industry should be paid more. This generosity of spirit, I think it's obvious, is designed to give unions the chance to organize fast food. If you have to pay adult wages, you'll hire adults.

Private sector unions, over the years, have been very successful at getting their Democratis legislative allies to pass laws which make it next to impossible to compete against them. Isn't there a federal law about having to pay the "prevailing" wage?

A friend of mine in the shipping business in Houston used to laugh about the most coveted job at the Port of Houston. It was the ILA guy who sat in a lawn chair, with a clipboard, checking off the containers as they were being off-loaded.

 

[ExileOnDaytonStreet]

Re: Wisconsin vs Total Recall

Union hack teachers have nothing to do with the state of education in this country. Got it.

Pointing out a huge problem in how our society treats compulsory education means that I'm negating any and all other arguments? Got it.

There's plenty of blame to go around. But union hack teachers simply must take their share of the blame.

See? Doesn't it feel better when you say things that make logical sense? I think we all feel a lot better now.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: Wisconsin vs Total Recall

Pointing out a huge problem in how our society treats compulsory education means that I'm negating any and all other arguments? Got it.

See? Doesn't it feel better when you say things that make logical sense? I think we all feel a lot better now.

A little snotty today, aren't we?

 

[ExileOnDaytonStreet]

Re: Wisconsin vs Total Recall

Margin of victory is meaningless. Our system is based on "fifty percent plus one." When a candidate wins, he wins, period. Whether it's by one point or 20. Wisconsin has favored liberal candidates over the years. Let's say since tailgunner Joe. Why is this so important to you? You're so interested in giving us lessons on civics, but haven't yet explained what difference it makes.

Certainly the Obama campaign thinks it's a swing state, now. Or they'd better. But swing isn't the same as tossup. Wisconsin is still listed as leaning Democratic. The failed temper tantrum by union goons and their Democratic allies may have exposed a fault line not easily ignored. Although you'd have to say His Oneness is the favorite in November. But this is all beside the point. Wisconsin, generally speaking, has been a liberal state for decades. Perhaps not as liberal as Massachusettes which voted for McGovern, but liberal.

I'm just saying that for the most part, those liberal candidates are winning on margins too small to be ignored. And the Gubernatorial results certainly don't back up your contentions (especially given what thread we're posting all of this in). You can say that Madison and Milwaukee are undoubtedly liberal strongholds, but that's hardly a statewide condition. Especially when you look at the Fox Valley and at the counties surrounding Milwaukee. This is the state that manages to give Jim Sensenbrenner a job, after all.

 

[ExileOnDaytonStreet]

Re: Wisconsin vs Total Recall

A little snotty today, aren't we?

At least its just today. Can you imagine if I was like this in every thread, every single day to the point where I was a running joke?

 

[Rover]

Re: Wisconsin vs Total Recall

You have noticed something pretty significant here.

I would suggest that the situation has more depth to it than you suggest. You say one side "does nothing" while the opponents "set the narrative." It appears to me that what underlies the situation you describe is something like this (I am trying to describe, not judge, to the extent that my limited abilities permit):

The conservatives take their opponents seriously. They acknowledge that their opponents have valid points, and many times they say to undecided / independent voters, "I can see how you might be tempted to think that way. We've examined that point of view, and here is where we find it lacking, and here is what we offer instead, and here is why we think you should choose our option instead of their option."

The progressives seem to be convinced that they are morally superior. They assume without providing justification that they are "right." They denigrate their opponents as "selfish" or "heartless" or "uncaring" or "stupid"* or "evil." They don't even respond to their opponents (look at the response from the progressives when it was first suggested that PPACA might be unconstitutional...bascially, it was a snort and a dismissive wave, no?).

Now, you call the former "setting the narrative" while you call the latter "doing nothing." Those labels also fit the narrative I describe.

Let's pretend we are undecided for a moment, not affiliated with either side. One side seriously tries to engage me in a dialog, the other side projects moral superiority and contempt for anyone who disagrees and offers no serious justification for their viewpoint. Regardless of what you personally believe to be the relative merits of either side, which approach do you think most people would find more congenial to being persuaded?











*(how much vitriol have we seen here directed at people who "get their opinions from Fox News"? how persuasive is it in a conversation to tell the other person, "I'm going to stick my fingers in my ears and start humming so that I don't have to listen to what you have to say." ? how receptive am I going to be, if I present for consideration information I've heard or read, for the other person to call me a liar unless I provide justification?)

Both sides think they're right and I don't feel Walker was big on negotiating. Now one could say that's because the Dems took off, and I'm not close enough to the goings on in Wisconsin to know. The difference I see is that the conservatives in this case, and more often than not feel the need to explain their position in a simple but clear way that the average voter will be able to process. Libs more so although they've gotten better at this at times feel that their take on this issue speaks for itself, and they don't bother to try to convince people, again in clear and simple terms, about why they have a better idea. That's a critical difference. In Ohio, the very same fight was messaged differently and the unions won out. Here they got crushed. They need to lose the arrogance that people will automatically tune out the other sides' arguments.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: Wisconsin vs Total Recall

I'm just saying that for the most part, those liberal candidates are winning on margins too small to be ignored. And the Gubernatorial results certainly don't back up your contentions (especially given what thread we're posting all of this in). You can say that Madison and Milwaukee are undoubtedly liberal strongholds, but that's hardly a statewide condition. Especially when you look at the Fox Valley and at the counties surrounding Milwaukee. This is the state that manages to give Jim Sensenbrenner a job, after all.

Bush II very nearly carried Wisconsin in '00 and in fact, was in Milwaukee when Gore sprang his October surprise about the ancient DWI ticket. That was on the Friday before the voting. But because there are enough conservatives to elect Sensenbrenner tells us more about redistricting than it does the nature of Wisconsin's electoral tendencies. You seem to be offended. I can't figure out why.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: Wisconsin vs Total Recall

At least its just today. Can you imagine if I was like this in every thread, every single day to the point where I was a running joke?

A running joke to the Luka Magnotta crowd, perhaps, but I can live with that.