The Wisconsin recall is over. Both remaining Democratic candidates that were being challenged to a recall held on to their seats tonight. What does this mean?
Democrats netted two seats total in the recall elections. It wasn’t enough to give them a majority in the Wisconsin assembly but it brought them within one vote. And it could spell a recall for Governor Scott Walker in 2012. This is no small feat since it requires almost half the population of Wisconsin to sign a petition to even move such a proposition forward. That’s the biggest hurdle. And after the previous contentious recall campaign does anyone even care?
Maybe. Those recalls were done in Republican strongholds not indicative of the popular statewide vote. It could be that collective distaste for Scott Walker could prove unstoppable, in which case a recall could become the domino that starts it all falling down.
We’ll have to wait and see.
Related articles
- 2 Democrats keep their seats in Wisconsin recall election (cnn.com)
- 2 Democrats keep their seats in Wisconsin recall election – CNN International (news.google.com)
- Wisconsin Recall Election Results: Democrats Keep State Senate Seats (huffingtonpost.com)
538 Refugees 
It seems to me that I’ve heard the domino theory somewhere before; much like predicting that Thailand would soon fall to the Commies, it’s an overreaction to make the best of a very expensive and inconclusive political sideshow.
In the case of the two Democratic takeaways, both of the Republican incumbents had severe deficits at the Bank of Public Trust. Dan Kapanke had some questionable ethical encounters, including the use of money from a charity to pay off a personal loan (albeit one that paid for lights at his minor-league ballpark that’s also used by the community). And Randy Hopper — who only won his seat in 2008 by a margin of less than 170 votes out of 83,000+ cast — carried massive political baggage. By the time of the recall, he had a broken marriage and an affair with a 25-year-old political aide, who subsequently received a plum state job at a higher-than-normal salary; a serious question of his residency and eligibility to hold office; and paying state income taxes once in the 11 years prior to being elected.
The inablity to take two of the four remaining state-senate seats shows that revolution isn’t in the air. And it’s no moral victory to claim that at least the citizens were engaged enough to sign petitions for this; I’m from California and, believe me, people will sign just about anything to get it on the ballot, from banning the slaughtering of horses for meat to changing the three-strikes law to mainly benefit a wealthy man’s son.
However, it’s also not a green light to embolden Scott Walker to do whatever he likes. This wasn’t a vote of confidence as much as a likely reaction against massive outside influence in small, local elections. And a one-vote majority in any legislative body isn’t a power you can always bank on for support.
I concur that the inability to retake the majority in the Wisconsin Senate is not yet reason to believe the Revolution is afoot but taking two Republican seats can’t be dismissed as a fluke either. To be honest, I would have been surprised if Darling had lost her district. Wisconsin was not a resounding victory nor was it a resounding failure. I think the message was sent and it appears that it was recieved as well. Ohio’s Governor is backpedalling on an anti-union issue as we speak. And I’m curious to see if it has any effect on pro-union Nevada next month in the 2nd District race.
And a one-vote majority in any legislative body isn’t a power you can always bank on for support.
Particularly when that vote is from a moderate Republican who voted against Scott Walker’s bill.
Pingback: Some Press Not Invited | Wis U.P. North