"0ne of those pathetic bloggers who tries to make a living out of attacking other bloggers and media folk in an effort to illicit a reaction and draw traffic to his site." -- Owen Robinson of Boots and Sabers
The WPRI post election poll finds that a mere 39% of Wisconsinites have a very/somewhat favorable opinion (70% Republican/14% Dems/41% independents) of the teabaggers (table 18).
Meanwhile, 37% (18% Republican/53% Dems/37% independents) have an unfavorable opinion. You'd think from the rhetoric of WalkerSykesPriebus that the whole of Wisconsin had taken up teabagging but fortunately that doesn't seem to be the case.
Indeed, fully 18% of Republicans gave him a favorable rating.
Sykes et al like to talk about Obama's cratering popularity. In Wisconsin, maybe not so much. It's worth noting that Obama's much demagogued health care plan (Sykes was out early with the Death Panel charge) has only 40% approval, but, then again, that's only 5 points less than Walker's.
Not a misprint. The WPRI post-election poll, widely covered because it showed 52% of Wisconsinites opposed the Milwaukee-Madison line, shows, on table 13, that merely 45% of Wisconsinites have a (very/somewhat) favorable opinion of Scott Walker.
"Scoreboard!" Got it, but Walker's favorable is only 7 points ahead of Jim Doyle's, who, we're told, is toxic. (Ron Johnson has a 42% favorable and Herb Kohl has a 55% favorable.) And recall that Doyle garnered more votes in his 2006 victory than Walker did in 2010.
The poll shows that 78% of Republicans, 18% of Dems and 44% of independents have a favorable opinion of Walker, Meanwhile, 35% have (very/somewhat) unfavorable opinion of Walker (8.1% of Republicans, 51.9% of Democrats, 38.7% of independents).
In the poll 14.2% of respondents (21% of Dems) didn't know/refused to answer.
Note that this poll was taken before the feds, taking Walker at his word, shifted the $810 million for the rail line to other states -- leaving Walker, who suggested it could be shifted to roads, with nothing.
A question and an observation.
What, exactly, has Walker done to win over anyone who doesn't have a favorable opinion since he won the election?
The reason that Charlie Sykes caterwauls about how lefties keep hammering on the train is because he's afraid it's working.
No, that's not a typo. It's from the cross-tabs of the WPRI post-election poll (page 43 in the cross tabs)-- you know, the one that showed 52 % of Wisconsinites opposed the Madison-Milwaukee line (itself a misnomer, but all's fair in a talk-radio driven disinformation campaign).
Weird thing is, more Wisconsinites -- including 40% of Republicans and 70% of independents -- favor increasing taxes on higher income earners as a means of alleviating the deficit than opposed the train*. But WPRI failed to mention that in its release -- shocking, given a think tank is all about the free pursuit of ideas, right? -- and the media failed to pick up on it.
Which is a pity. The train is dead in Wisconsin, the federal dollars that would have built it resurrected in other states. But the state still faces a more than $3 billion deficit, so you would think the public's desire to increase taxes on the rich to address that would be in the public discussion. But strangely it's not. Instead, the only discussion seems to be around how much public employees can be bled.
Patrick McIlheran made the case that the poll results showed that the train should be killed. As did Sykes.
Surely they will call for taxes to be increased on the rich (and please, let's not kid ourselves that tax cuts for the rich= jobs, the anemic job growth of the Bush Administration is proof positive they don't) with equal vehemence. Right?
* A whopping 1% said killing the train was a top priority.
[Kai] Metcalf, in an interview at her lawyer's office, said she did have a problem when the greeter, Lois Speelman, kept complaining about "you people," before saying something to the effect of, "You people think you can do whatever you want. Not today." ...
A police report released Thursday shows Speelman made similarly racially charged comments to prosecutors while discussing the case last week.
Speelman told prosecutors that "these types of people" often become upset when she checks their receipts, the report says.
When she was asked to clarify what she meant by "these types of people," Speelman said, "Mexicans, Spanish and colored people," according to the report.
Speelman also said "these types of people" are "difficult to deal with," the report says.
Patrick McIlheran, the comically inept conservative columnist for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, is exultant over the death of the train connection to Madison. Which makes sense, given Madison has been recognized as a brainy place, and McIlheran has a well-documented disdain for brainy people.
McIlheran wraps his opposition in a mantle of fiscal rectitude, which is, of course, laughable given he has vigorously supported the US fighting two wars without paying for them. And he would probably favor a war with Iran, just to make it three.
Because if he were a conservative on things transport related, you think he would have supported a position on the Hoan Bridge that would have been respectful of the public coffers. Particularly given that most Wisconsinites don't use that particular stretch of road. Shoot, most Milwaukeeans don't.
Well, you'd be wrong. When the idea of tearing down the Hoan Bridge and replacing it with a smaller bridge -- which would open the surrounding area to development worth billions -- McIlheran opposed it. Why? It would add a few minutes on to the commute of some people coming in to work from the south suburbs! Even though the cost of a smaller bridge ($220 million) would cost less than redecking the current one ($240 million) and much less than the additional cost to be incurred when the whole thing needs to be redone in 2050 (estimated at $800 million, but surely more). McIlheran's reaction to that? "The real money on the Hoan isn't until the 2050 anyway."
Paying for a train that will connect Milwaukee and Madison -- robbery! Spending more than $1 billion to save commuters a few minutes -- and forgoing lakefront development -- when less expensive options are available? Right on! Truly, a conservative position.
Because the report devoted five pages (49-54) to the scandal of campaign workers voting in the 2004 election and then going back to where they came from. While these campaign workers may have met the minimum standard to vote in Wisconsin -- residency for 10 days or more prior to an election -- they fell short of language under Wisconsin 6.10 (1) "without any present intent to move" or language under 6.10 (8) that states "no person gains residence in any Ward or election district of this state while there for temporary purposes only."
Given that Jill Bader, per her twitter page, plans to move to Washington DC (presumably to work for professional politicians) after a jaunt through Australia, clearly she intended to be in our great state temporarily.
The unsanctioned cops report is taken as gospel by voter fraud scare mongers (though it's unclear how many actually read the stale, thin piece). If they take it seriously, they will call for Jill Bader to be brought up on charges if she in fact voted for Scott Walker.
UPDATE: In comments, Z-Dub notes his searches found no sign of Jill Bader registering to vote in WI.