Well Bill- if you look at the Sunday editorial in the JS you will understand "for what". For what Bill?- how about the greatest examples of democracy at work. The millions spent on attack ads appeared to cancel each other out. For what? How about Walker realizing he can't push his extreme agenda down our throats. For What? When the CB law and redistricting gets shot back to the senate you will realize for what. Dig a little deeper Bill. Thanks for your article.

Don't mind the union sympathizers on here Bill. They're mad about that $30 million being taken out of their paychecks.

Once again Nate , you put your foot in your mouth. You think the Dems were the only ones spending money on ads ? " 30 million being taken out of their paychecks ." You need to get a life.

Well my point proven these clowns still have burrs in their panties.

@Nate...Those aren't burns, those are skid marks. The fact of the matter is a ton of money was spent on these recalls- over half by the Dems and mainly Union money. If they really cared about the little guy- why didn;t they spend the money helping the little guy? Think of the financial aid that could have been given to the hungry and homeless.
The good news is the Unions will not be burned again- they are not going to spend millions here in WI again. By the time Walker is eligible to recall, they will see the good that has come BRB. Wisconsin's economy is going to improve ahead of the Nation- sadly that means the Unions funds will improve due to Walker's actions.
And the idiots will use that money to try to oust him from office.

Was spending $40 million to finance the recent recall elestions worthwhile? Well now, I suppose the answer depends on whether or not you think elected officials should be publicly accountable.

To answer the question, yes, it was worth the money. If people can sacrifice their lives to establish and defend the Constitution, the least we can do is to hold an election for those who died to freely give us this inheritance, a legacy that many of those who went before us never lived to enjoy themselves. yes, it was worth it. Now, if only they could stop gerrymandering the districts!

However, I have long believed that the Shorewood Men's club or other group in Shorewood should hold elections for "Village Idiot". The rules would be simple. Only persons volunteering to be on the ballot could be on the ballot (no write ins)....No candidate can accept donations to fund his or her campaign, and there would be a charge to purchase each ballot, say 1-5 dollars with all the money would go to charity. In support of a sound, grass roots community fund raising event, the village could issue an "Official" certification for the position of "Village Idiot" In such an election, I would campaign hard to be the offical "Village Idiot" of Shorewood, but most people believe I do not have to try very hard.

The number that is cited for the cost per ballot in this blog is said to have come from "Special interest groups and candidate campaign funds". It should be worth noting that both are funding sources that do not use public money and are not supposed to be tax deductible. One could argue that this high dollar amount spent by privately funded sources is in itself an expression of the democratic process, and in some ways could be a more useful representation of the public conscience than a regulated vote in established gerrymadered districts. I am very very sick of all the politico ads. I do not like them and despise them as much as anyone....but this blog takes a number of private money and seems to distort the number as the cited cost was a public expense. I am sure there were public expenses to holding an election, but these are not cited. There are logical flaws in the premise on which this dialog is based. It is a shame that some have commented on this flawed premise. It would be more useful to demonstrate the actual costs from the public coffers and ask the same question as those costs are the only ones relevant to the authors question. To propose numbers that are not relevant to the question, but only sublimate in order to appear so is no better than propaganda of Stalin, Hitler, or Fox News.

In a way we should appreciate the infusion of the campaign money into the Wisconsin economy. It will offset the millions of dollars that won't be spent by public workers after the reduced paychecks go into effect the end of August!

Ask the folks who supplied the cash if they're happy with the results. I threw all paper ads into the trash, refused to answer my phone and stopped watching local tv. I knew who I was going to vote for and no amount of money spent changed my mind.

For what? For sending a message to Walker, Darling and the rest of the trogolodytes. Yeah, the Trogs kept a small majority, but does anyone in his/her right mind think Scott the Twerp would be make conciliatory noises, no matter how insincere, had he not seen that there would be serious pushback? All he's trying to do is to forestall his own recall election, but it won't work.

I, for one, will do my damnedest to get him out next year!

It's certainly not in Walker's DNA to compromise or work with people. We shall see. In the meantime, sign the pledge to recall Walker.

If nothing else, the outcome of therecall election sends a message to Darling and the other Walker clones that their far-right agenda doesn't play well, and that the voters expect greater bipartisanship and a more moderate stance.

One could hardly claim Darling's victory as a resounding win. In reality, 45% if her constituents think she's doing such a lousy job she should be ousted before her term expires, That's not much of a mandate, is it?

Well, given that Ozaukee county is the most partisan district in the State (even though walker claims its Madison, with an average 60% to 40% Democrat to Republican pattern, Ozaukee county has been a 30% to 70% split for over the last decade)....Given the heavy bias of the North end of Darlings district, I find it hard to accept that Ozaukee County basically determines the representation for the entire north shore and north end of Milwaukee. Actually the numbers show that in shorewood, more than 45% of darlings constituents wish she were gone, and of course, the final polls from an entirely different county dictate the representation we have.

There we go with the insults again, Cow Dung. Is that the only gear you've got -- insulting people's professional capabilities? Are you here you have a discussion, or to play the troll?

I don't happen to have Darling's exact margin of victory. Perhaps you'f like to enlighten us. But, however you slcie it, an alarmingly large contingent of SD8 constituents voted to throw Darling out! She does not have anything resembling a sweeping mandate in this dirtict -- of course your GOP friends will fix that by creating a gerrymander!

If special interest campaign costs serves as an arguement against a recall, why did the Republicans force a primary to extend the process? Even the Wisconsin Republican party said it was to delay the recall and give the republican party time to raise money for the re election campaign.

And now they claim the money they raised from private donations for the recall call campaign is proof of government waste!

king oedepus did not believe he was the cause of the blight on thebes, and tore out his eyes when he saw the light. "The fault lies not in our stars horatio, but in ourselves" wrote the immortal bard.

Mankind has not evolved.

and the new redistricting map is even worse. There are only 3 counties that have an historically strong democratic vote. Milwaukee, Dane, and Bayfield. These average only about 55-45% up to 60-40% averages for a democrat ballot majority. Most counties in Wisconsin are very close with margins that favor republicans within 5%, and a few that historically are 60-40% or better to favor Republican ballots. Ozaukee county historically being at least 70-30% favoring republicans. The new redistricting map for example, dilutes Bayfield by adding it to a district with many more republican voters so now the people of Fond du lac can dictate who will represent Bayfield county! Where is the conservative voice that decries how the government is too tyranical and has too much power? Where is the Conservative in one county who practices what they preach and calls for a representation map that allows them to have their chosen representative, but will also stand up for the communities that are deprived of the same liberty? Where is the Conservative that will do on to others as they wish to have done on to them, instead of gerrymandering a district to gain even more?

I disagree that unions are on their last gasp, Patriot. That's just the view the Koch boys and their corporate croniew want to perpetuate.

the question, is "45 dollars a ballot....for what?"

the answer is "those who paid the money have gotten a great deal of satisfaction from spending it, proving to themselves the glory of their own rightness."

and if you consider that 45 dollars is less than good seats to a ball game, its a fair ticket price based on free market rates.

Cow Dung --
Kindly have your facts straight the next time you chose to insult my mathematical skills.

The vote totals in the 8th Senate District recall election, certified last Thursday by the Government Accountability Board, show that Sandy Pasch netted 34,071 votes, or 46.31% of the vote total.

In answer to your earlier question, I have no choice but to believe those numbers reflect that nearly half of all voters in SD8 wanted Darling run out on a rail before the end of her term! You see, that's one of the basic tenets of our electoral system; Those that vote speak for those who don't!

and of course the new district that puts shorewood in lana taylors district is done so because of greater fairness exclusively, and eliminates gerrymandering....lol!

The recalls were a farce, a waste of money and a waste of resources. Most of the voters had no comprehension of the issues at hand. The recall laws need reform. Our state has seen too many displays of political theater, most with little effect. I think some actual thought into policy would be refreshing.

so much emotion over a vowel

235301...you are correct in the fact that in the recall election, Darling won by 53.62% and in 2008 she won by about 50.1%. In 2008 by about 50,125 votes, and in the recall election 10,676 fewer votes than she did in 2008, or 39,449 ballots cast. You are correct Darling won by a larger margin. Yet there are different ways this can be interpreted. In 2008, Sheldon Wasserman received 15,047 more votes than Sandy Pasch did in the recall election. This difference is over 38% of Darlings total votes in the recall election. Maybe you are right, and the 2.6% greater margin in which Darling won the recall is more significant than the loss of over 10,000 of her past supporters, showing a more solid base of core support for darling. But it could also be interpreted that Sheldon Wasserman may have been a stronger opponent than was Pasch. Maybe....there are many ways things can be interpreted. Some ways are useful, some are not, some ways seem straightforward. sometimes things that are counter intuitive are revealed. maybe you are right. but maybe there is more to interpretation.

in the '70s, Steve Martin had a joke that the best way to curb over population was to pass a law that mandated death penalty for the parking violation. I guess now it should be death penalty for a typo.....but you have a point about....in the 1800rds, most of the Federal Budget was funded by import taxes, and a law passed that said there would be "no taxes on imported Fruit-Trees..." but because of a typo, the signed bill read "no taxes on imported Fruit, Trees..." it took 6 months to correct and a steady loss of revenue as a result. My Lena forgive me for my typo, but thankfully my typo did not deprive the government of its revenue but unfortunately, my typo did not give reprieve to the tax payer, which once did occur in our nations history so many years ago due to a typo. Sometimes the file clerk wields more power than all the kings horses and all the kings men, and sometimes I am like humpty dumpty.

Darling lost to Wassernam by a slim 1007 votes. However, there were over 100,000 votes cast in that election . . . less tan in the recall. The takeaway there is that Pasch didn;t face a challenger with name recognition and an established track record. She was lucky!

Cow Dung --
You seem to infer that there are legions of Darling supporters that simply chose not to vote in when their champion was being recalled.. That's just not reality, but it doesn't really matter.

As I said before. those that don't vote don't count. The statistics speak for themselves; 46.31 percent of voters thought Alberta deserved her walking papers-- and I'm one of them!

Look, you can argue it however you wish. Darling's mandate in SD8 is

Who is Sandy Pasch?

Wasserman would have kicked Darling's bony keister around the block, except that the GOP promised to draw him out of his own district if he decided to run.

CD: "My problem with your statement is that the number of voters in this past recall election do not represent the entirety of Darling's constituents..."

KB: Oh, but I'm afraid they do represent the entirety of Darling's constituents! The folks that didn't care enough to vote allow those that did cast ballots to speak for them.

You assert that there are legions of Darling supporters who sat at home rather than coming to the aid of their candidate. Where were they? Why would they sit at home, rather than springing to the aid of their recalled candidate?

The fact is that those legions of non-voting Darling minions don't really exist, and your assetion doesn't hold water. In the 2008 general election, 49 percent of the voters preferred Sheldon Wasserman to Alberta. Do you mean to suggest that throngs of Darling supporters stayed away from the polls then, too? B*llsh*t!

It is what it is- Darling can now coninue ignore with greater blindness ) as she did before) all the blue wards who can't stand her and wanted her out. 34 thousand + wanted her out. I am proud to say that I worked my keister off trying to remove this sorry excuse for a state senator. No regrets. Many rewards to seeing this Prozac babe sweat and work for her votes.

Our system is not those who vote speak for those who don't. That is rule by mob and nothing more than pogrom riots and contrary to the tradition of common law. That is a principle of rule by mob.

Gerrymandering allows the politicians to choose the voters, not the other way around.

In economics the spending is not an issue. The return on investment is what
counts. Invested in education and infrastructure you'd see a net gain. This would
more than justify the expense. Invested in political recall campaigns the ROI is
-zip. and the money is gone forever.

No, it certainly wasn't an efficient use of money. It did give some people who feel they've been marginalized an opportunity to vent. And it proved what we already knew: calling a do-over on a closely-decided election may cause the outcome to flip one way or the other each time, and as a state we remain narrowly divided politically.

"It's at least as misleading to imply that people who don't bother to participate in a recall election want the incumbent recalled."

JBW, I"LL THANK YOU NOT TO PUT WORDS IN MY MOUTH! I never said that people who don't vote want the incumbent recalled. The point is that It's impossible to know what they want.

What I said is that people who don't vote lose out on an opportunity to make their opinions known and have their voice heard. Specifically, I was refuting Cow Dung. who claims Darling enjoys more widespread support in her district than the vote totals suggest. He seems to think there are legions of Darnling voters who mysteriously opted not to vote in the recall election.

I have long enjoyed the friendship and companionship of Republicans because I am by instinct a teacher, and I would like to teach them something.
Woodrow Wilson

Cow Dung, what you’re claiming is that all 39,449 people who voted for Darling plus all the people who didn’t vote at all wanted to keep the incumbent. That’s simply asinine! Unless you are The Amazing Kreskin, how could you possibly know that?

You have no basis, other than your own personal bias, for claiming every non-voter as a Darling supporter. Isn’t it possible that there were Pasch supporters that didn’t vote, or eligible voters who simply didn’t give a rip for either candidate?

The vote margins more or less accurately reflect Darling’s razor thin approval rating. Slice it however you will, slightly less than half of Alberta's constituents would rather be represented by someone else. This is borne out by the recall results, by the results of the November 2008 general election, and numerous independent polls.

"Darling had a job approval rating of 51 percent with 46 percent disapproving."
-- Daily Kos poll, July 28, 2011

Wow, that sure seems to validate the election results!

Has anyone herd from Pasch, did she dig a hole and go into hiding? Or did the unions take care of her with cement boots?

For what? How about putting the breaks on Walker and his corporate lobbyist sponsered legislative attack on Wisconsin. Now at least there will be some compromise and perhaps a few of the Republicans may re-think whether they want to be buried with Walker or actually represent their districts. I have always been an independent and have voted for both Republicans and Democrats over the years. This current crop is radical and not representative of what the GOP in Wisconsin has ever stood for. I supported Tommy Thompson, I do not support Scott Walker. After the job he did in Milwaukee County he shouldn't have been elected dog catcher!

Cow Dung, you don't trust polls conducted by a "lefty organization?" Hell, you don't trust anybody that doesn't support your twisted point of view.

While it is admittedly a liberal organization, The Daily Koz's polls have always been fair, objective, and scientific. They have never been skewed to show support Democratic candidates when that support didn't exist.

The survey I quoted polled 1,476 likely voters and was conducted [over a four day period]. It had a margin of error of plus or minus 2.6 percentage points.

Cow Dung, I was referring to Steve who seems to confuse the words HERD and HEARD.

Steve, you delude yourself into believing Darling's base of support is broader than it really is. In reality, it's razor thin, and the results of the 2008 election, numerous polls and the recall numbers prove it.

You also delude yourself about the character of this election. It wasn't fueled by the emotions of knee-jerk liberals. It was brought on by responsible citizens who expect accountability and transparency in government.

Yeah, it's easy to say that every lefty in the district swarmed to the polls, while thousands of Darling supporters inexplicably stayed home allowing their favored candidate to face recall without their support. But that ain't reality. The republicans tried just as hard as the dems to mobilize every possible voter, but 39,449 is all the GOP could muster.

So where were all those non-voting Darling supporters in the 2008 general election when Darling clung to her office by a paltry 1007 votes? Did they stay home then, too? Did they also decline to participate in polling? The fact is that your silent majority does not exist, and that Alberta did not win easily. I know for a fact that your candidate was sweating bullets!

"Bad officials are the ones elected by good citizens who do not vote."
George Jean Nathan

"If someone really wanted her out of office, it makes sense that they would be motivated to go out and vote for her removal."

By the same token, it seems that someone who really wanted to retain Darling would be motivated to go out and vote for her, rather than sit idly at home. The Darling minons were out in force. Their official number, as far as I and the State of Wisconsin are concerned, is 39.449 . . . a pathetic showing for an incumbent in a district of some 180,000 people!

"Funniest thing I have read all week. How'd that one Kos poll that put Pasch up 4 points work out for ya? If you are going to spew liberal garbage at least know how to spin it correctly. Ok, time for you to talk down on me like a typical Elitist keyboard warrior."

The one Daily Kos poll was scientifically conducted and accurately reflected (within a small margin of error) public sentiments at that time. I'm sure you are aware, however, that there is a certain ebb and flow in the course of an election as undecided voters migrate toard one candidate or the other.

Perhaps a better gauge of how many people want Darling removed from office would be the number of recall signatures collected. It seems that the canvassers went to every home in the district at least once (they came to my home three times), stood on street corners and at various public gatherings. If all they could get were between 20k and 30k signatures (out of 180k people), it would indicate that the vast majority of people (5 out of every 6) wanted Darling to stay in office...

Ain't that just like a right-wing whack job? When you present them with hard evidence, they try to discredit the source. When you prove them wrong, they resort to name-calling. Whose the elitist keyboard warrior here?

"Perhaps a better gauge of how many people want Darling removed from office would be the number of recall signatures collected."

As for recall petitions, we collected 20% more signatures than required to compensate for any that might have been 'disqualified.' After that we stopped gathering as a concession to time. Given more time, we'd have gathered more -- many more,

Once again, stop impugning the polling agency just because their numbers don't support your argument.

Actually, the daily Kos polls tend to very accurate and objective. They are scientifically constructed and use random sampling techniques. To my knowledge, they have never reflected partisan bias.When the dems are up, they report that. When the dems are trailing, they report that, too.

It bears note that the Daily Kos numbers are also corroborated by independent polling organizations. For instance, a July 13 and 14 poll conducted by the Mellman Group showed Pasch pulling slightly ahead with 47 percent of the votes, compared with Darling's 46 percent. The magrin of errot was plus or minus 5 percentage points.

Make that: "The magrin of ERROR was plus or minus 5 percentage points."

Rushlimbaugh.com or redstate if it would make you feel better."

Rush Limbaugh? Now THERE"S a credible and unbiased source! The man is a drug-addicted, ultra-liberal, screed-spewing entartainer!

Oh, and if you're referring to Daily Kos as my "favorite website," you're sadly mistaken.

"magrin of errot"
"Make that: "The magrin of ERROR"
Try again... margin of error.