New Posts
By:
Filters
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

On buying elections and failed policies

TomFitz

TomFitz

Mayor
For much of this week, the GOP has been celebrating saving Scott Walker's seat in Wisconsin. At the same time, they've been furiously pretending that that election was a populist uprising and not the result of big money big footing the electorate. Yet, even the most conservative estimates on spending on that campaign claims that the GOP outspent the Democrats and the unions 4 to 1 That's probably the reported contributions, not the suuper pac money, which doesn't have to be reported.

And yet, the conservatives live in denial. This quote is typical.

can we please drop this absurd pretense that one party has the monopoly on money in politics?
Click to expand...

Instead of acknowledging the well documented reality, the right is making excuses for the party that used to brag about how they sold themselves to Wall Street.

Of course, the Koch's are always trying to hide what they're up to, but not being very successful at it.

Yes, this election cycle will be all about money.

Why? Because a Conservative Supreme Court made it so. And because the Republican Party blocked any attempt to right the wrong.

The crucial difference is that the Democratic money is coming from ordinary people and from people who represent ordinary people (unions), while the GOP money is coming from Wall Street and oil.

need proof?

http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/c...politics#canda=barack-obama&candb=mitt-romney

Take a look at who's getting the donations of less than $200.

Then read this:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0512/76849.html

Now, here's George W Bush talking to the American Banker's Association.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mn4daYJzyls

The pattern should be obvious.

George W Bush and Karl Rove used to boast about the car load of Wall Steet and oil money that flowed their way. They kept faith by gutting enviornmental regulations, giving away drilling rights on federal lands, and making sure that the Wall Street casino wasn't going to be raided by any pesky regulators.

And we got the crash of 2008 to show for it.

Now the same people are buying the GOP and trying to sell the American people the same dusted off Reaganomics that failed so miserably in 1980 and again in 2000, reaching it's inevitable conclusion in 2008.

The only thing that really amazes me about all this is that many of the same people who fell for this message the last two times it was trotted out, are all on board again.

Speaking personally, I fell for Reaganomics in 1980.

I didn't buy the 2000 re-run.

And I'm certainly not falling for it again in 2012!
 
Repeating talking points from the Wall Street Journal isn't going to get you any credit.

The unions did work this election, but the Democratic party didn't.

This time last week, many liberals were complaining about it.

Try denying that fact, and I'll bury you with references.
 
Walker had $30 million to Barrett's $3 million......plus Walker had plenty of time and resources to change the narrative to "recalls were dumb" and the people bought it. Barrett had less than a month to make his case.
 
If Walker and his policies were as bad as the left says it was, Walker would have never gotten elected. The fact is, the left failed to back Barrett in the way they should have, so they blame the right for their backing of their candidate. Hell even the socialist President of America wouldn't even back Barrett because he was afraid of looking bad if Barrett lost. The left refuses to back their candidate an than cry a river when he looses, what a bunch of pathic people you are.
 
Walker would have never gotten elected had he run on the agenda that he enacted once elected. Bait and switch only goes over well for those with the intellectual capacity of a Guppy. Then again, that's about all that's required when one is living inside a bubble.
 
So what, exactly, did the "big money" do? Did they pay people to vote for Walker? Did they pay for a massive brain washing campaign that convinced people to vote for something other than what they thought they were voting for? No! They used the money to educate the public regarding what the cost was of these public employee unions and on the good effects of the policy changes Walker implemented. It is no coincidence that towards the end no one on the Barrett campaign was talking about unions. That's because they saw the polling and people were taught the truth about them and made that aspect of the recall (which was its very genesis) toxic waste. It was used to publicize the benefits to students:

Places like the New Berlin school district, with its 4,700 students, have already reduced health-care costs by $2.3 million, retirement costs by $1.25 million, and other liabilities by $15 million. The district hired new staff, reduced class sizes, and added programs. The Shorewood district saved $537,000 simply by bidding out its health contract (previously run by a union outfit), and also reduced insurance premiums for its teachers.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303753904577452862561051838.html?KEYWORDS=Walker

What has happened is that the unions lost the position of being the sole big money in the election which gave them carte blanche to portray their corruption and greed as "fairness." And that is good for the future of America...
 
If Walkers policies offended the electorate that much, then the backlash from the voters should have prevailed.
 
Bluedog said:
If Walkers policies offended the electorate that much, then the backlash from the voters should have prevailed.
Click to expand...

Exactly! The unions didn't have the only megaphone like they used to so they couldn't generate sympathy by framing their issues in a way that made it look like the taxpayer would suffer if they didn't get their way (when in fact, the truth is the exact opposite).
 
If Walker and his policies were as bad as the left says it was, Walker would have never gotten elected.
Click to expand...

That would be true, if Walker's attempts to crush the bargaining rights of the unions was what he ran on.

But it wasn't. Walker hid his agenda until after the election and marched in to the legislature (a GOP controlled one, ready to rubber stamp whatever Walker's client's demanded) with an agenda that had nothing to do with what he ran on.
 
Lukey said:
Exactly! The unions didn't have the only megaphone like they used to so they couldn't generate sympathy by framing their issues in a way that made it look like the taxpayer would suffer if they didn't get their way (when in fact, the truth is the exact opposite).
Click to expand...


Wait a minute! You wingers were all busy denying that the unions were outspent between 4 and 9 to one!

Which is it?

If you're going to pick a narrative, try and settle on something consistant!
 
TomFitz said:
Wait a minute! You wingers were all busy denying that the unions were outspent between 4 and 9 to one!

Which is it?

If you're going to pick a narrative, try and settle on something consistant!
Click to expand...

MY point was that both sides had the money to get their message out and the truth (that unions lead inevitably to failure and ruin) won out...
 
Lukey said:
Exactly! The unions didn't have the only megaphone like they used to so they couldn't generate sympathy by framing their issues in a way that made it look like the taxpayer would suffer if they didn't get their way (when in fact, the truth is the exact opposite).
Click to expand...

Unions have never had the "only" megaphone Sport. Maybe in the myth believing minds of conservatives and their uninformed followers , but never in reality. The biggst and loudest magaphones always end up in the hands of those that can afford it.

Considering that union participation makes up only 11.8% of the total U.S. work force , and that public sector unions only comprise 37% of that figure , one would surmise they don't have the money to get much publicity.
 
Proud Progressive said:
Unions have never had the "only" megaphone Sport. Maybe in the myth believing minds of conservatives and their uninformed followers , but never in reality. The biggst and loudest magaphones always end up in the hands of those that can afford it.

Considering that union participation makes up only 11.8% of the total U.S. work force , and that public sector unions only comprise 37% of that figure , one would surmise they don't have the money to get much publicity.
Click to expand...
The Koch Brothers have more money than all of the unions combinned.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top