Wisconsin Judge race

[soundforbjt]

However, no matter the outcome of this race, labor has to make it's case and will likely lose even in she wins and doesn't recuse herself. It will be interesting though - it'll tell us quite a bit about how good of a judge she is based on her position/ruling.

So, unless she rules the way you think she should rule, she's a bad judge...got it. 🙄

 

[CADsortaGUY]

So, unless she rules the way you think she should rule, she's a bad judge...got it. 🙄

Nevermind- I thought they were seated quickly but their term doesn't start until August, so the union case should be long over by then. I misremembered it as June 1.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Clinging on to not losing by as much as they feared is how losers talk when they lose.

No one is clinging - just stating the fact that the left and the union thugs thought they had it in the bag and that EVERYONE was against Walker and they were going to destroy Prosser because of it. 204 votes isn't even close to destroy. But hey, continue on with your BS...

 

[theeedude]

No one is clinging - just stating the fact that the left and the union thugs thought they had it in the bag and that EVERYONE was against Walker and they were going to destroy Prosser because of it. 204 votes isn't even close to destroy. But hey, continue on with your BS...

I guess teachers are now pro-union thugs in your mind. Call them what you want, but they seem to have unseated only the 5th judge ever despite being outspent 3:2 by out of state corporatist scum. That is a strong rebuke to GOP's policies, one that is going to be amplified as time goes forward. More directly, there is going to be a lot more judicial scrutiny to bills GOP passes.

 

[chowderhead]

David Prosser got 55% of the vote in the Feb. primary while Kloppenburg got around 28%. I am not sure why he didn't get to win outright back then but those are the rules and they had a runoff. Prosser lost 5% from his February results while Kloppenburg made up 22% to oust a sitting state Supreme Court Justice who ran unopposed previously. She was the clear underdog and it was a feat to defeat Prosser.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

I guess teachers are now pro-union thugs in your mind. Call them what you want, but they seem to have unseated only the 5th judge ever despite being outspent 3:2 by out of state corporatist scum. That is a strong rebuke to GOP's policies, one that is going to be amplified as time goes forward. More directly, there is going to be a lot more judicial scrutiny to bills GOP passes.

Uh, teachers who are union thugs are - yes. Not all teachers bought the union BS and when all batshit crazy.
Yeah, they have possibly defeated Prosser. And? Here in Iowa we took 3 down last fall. Wisconsin's case was because the left got worked up over the union bill and took it out on Prosser. They were supposed to destroy him - barely(if) is hardly destroying.
BTW, was the large GOP gain in November a rebuke of BHO and other individual state dem policies? BTW, that one wasn't a squeaker .03% or something either.

 

[chowderhead]

absolutely 2010 was a rebuke to Obama and the Democratic policies. Just like if Wisconsin Democrats and the unions manage to recall these Republican/Democratic state Senators.

 

[theeedude]

Uh, teachers who are union thugs are - yes. Not all teachers bought the union BS and when all batshit crazy.
Yeah, they have possibly defeated Prosser. And? Here in Iowa we took 3 down last fall. Wisconsin's case was because the left got worked up over the union bill and took it out on Prosser. They were supposed to destroy him - barely(if) is hardly destroying.
BTW, was the large GOP gain in November a rebuke of BHO and other individual state dem policies? BTW, that one wasn't a squeaker .03% or something either.

Sure it was rebuke of BHO, GOP misread it as mandate to bash teachers, and now got rebuked itself. You can bury head in sand if you want to. Prosser got beaten, WI supreme court taken over by liberals, Mission Accomplished. If GOP wants to wait till recalls go through to get the message, Democrats will oblige.

 

[spidey07]

Stay class democrats, always trying to rig elections.

http://punditpress.blogspot.com/2011/04/wisconsin-city-caught-destroying.html

As if the situation in Wisconsin wasn't tense enough, it appears that one county in particular is going to a new extreme. This comes after word that there may have been voter fraud in the nonpartisan State Supreme Court election yesterday between incumbent David Prosser and JoAnne Kloppenburg.

For some reason one of the counties in the state is destroying ballots that 'were not counted' yesterday. Apparently this is a very bizarre and egregious move.

 

[theeedude]

More desperate unsubstantiated claims from the rightwing sore losers.

 

[Fear No Evil]

Kind of like the sore losers who can't accept the fact that Walker won the Governorship, the Republicans won the Senate, and the House, and the only way the D's can stop them is by fleeing the state and hoping an extreme partisan for the Supreme Court will block everything? Sore losers like that?

 

[theeedude]

Kind of like the sore losers who can't accept the fact that Walker won the Governorship, the Republicans won the Senate, and the House, and the only way the D's can stop them is by fleeing the state and hoping an extreme partisan for the Supreme Court will block everything? Sore losers like that?

Except those guys didn't just whine and make unsubstantiated claims, they fought back and kicked your guys butt.
Not only that, but closeness of this is only playing into Democrat's hands. Recounts and litigation is only going to keep this issue on the boil going into the recount campaign, which will then keep it on the boil going into the 2012 elections. Motivated Democrat voters turning out in battleground state is a good thing for America.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Stay class democrats, always trying to rig elections.

http://punditpress.blogspot.com/2011/04/wisconsin-city-caught-destroying.html

Was there any doubt we'd hear things like this coming from places like that?

 

[theeedude]

Was there any doubt we'd hear things like this coming from places like that?

No. I don't think anyone was doubting we'd be hearing this sort of unsubstantiated whining from the sore losers on the right.

 

[fskimospy]

Was there any doubt we'd hear things like this coming from places like that?

No, there was absolutely no doubt that we would hear hysterical right wing accusations of voter fraud if they lost an election. It happens every time.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

No, there was absolutely no doubt that we would hear hysterical right wing accusations of voter fraud if they lost an election. It happens every time.

lol, yeah we know fraud happens every time but some of you sweep it under the rug and won't aloow common sense election reform. seems there was quite the "registration" effort yesterday in wisconsin...

BTW, rumor has it that the count has changed yet again and Prosser is winning. We won't know verified totals for a while yet so things can change since the margin is so tiny.

 

[fskimospy]

lol, yeah we know fraud happens every time but some of you sweep it under the rug and won't aloow common sense election reform. seems there was quite the "registration" effort yesterday in wisconsin...

BTW, rumor has it that the count has changed yet again and Prosser is winning. We won't know verified totals for a while yet so things can change since the margin is so tiny.

That's because reality keeps getting in the way and study after study shows no evidence for it. But hey, reality has never really been your strong suit anyway.

I've seen you post long enough to know that you would throw a temper tantrum if you lost, and blame nefarious outside sources as opposed to just admitting it. It's sort of your thing.

 

[Jhhnn]

That's correct. It's technically a non-partisan race, though the parties make it perfectly clear who they support.

That being said, it's extremely difficult to unseat a sitting judge in races like these. They either have to do something incredibly stupid that gets their name known to the public in a negative way (I mean, what % of people in any state could name any of their state supreme court justices? 10%? That's probably high), or there has to be a strong will to buck the system for one reason or another, and that's what's going on in Wisconsin right now.

QFT. That's the same everywhere in this country. Incumbency is a huge advantage in such races.

So we have Repubs running scared in Wisconsin, as they should be, and our usual Righties trying to spin it some other way, up to and including pre-emptive attacks of fraud.

In their minds, it must be fraud if they're losing, obviously, because they're oh so right, they just know it...

From what I can tell, Ozaukee county is heavily republican, so I rather doubt they're poorly represented at the polling places or during the vote counting, either...

Spidey's source fairly reeks of empty innuendo and conspiracy theory, unsurprisingly...

 

[classy]

I've practiced law in two states-one with judicial elections (WI) and one without. Of the two, it's my reluctant conclusion that judicial elections are a bad concept. Elections very much exaggerate the "local boy" effect, where out of town counsel has to fight uphill from the start. Technically judges were not supposed to participate in fund raising or even know who he contributors are, but every time I contributed to a judge's campaign I was personally welcomed very warmly by that judge the next time I was in his/her courtroom.

It is also my firm belief that poltical issues have absolutely no place in deciding who should be a judge, except perhaps on the US Supreme Court, where nearly every decision is a political issue.

The worst judge-by far-in Milwaukee county when I was there was also the highest vote getter (also by far).

I'm not sure what the best selection process is (here they are nominated by the Governor, approved by the Legislature for a limited renewable term) and this process gives the legislative judicial committee way too much power.

I think the Indiana Supreme Court recently went through a similar turmoil due to it's controversial decision on same sex marriage., where the fundamentalists voted out the offending Justices.

Justice is not something that is determined by what is most popular at the moment.

I disagree because being voted on by people is a better selection process than being appointed. Appointments are never unbiased, where an election does have some neutral influence. While it may not be suitable for all offices on a federal level, it should be used in any and all state level positions. Its not perfect by any long shot, but it is the lesser of two evils by a large degree IMO.

 

[cubby1223]

This is another sad chapter in the progression of this country...

Judges should not be political. Not be policy deciders.

But that's what this election represents.

 

[manimal]

hey spidey where is your will of the people mantra?



just curious...

 

[cubby1223]

QFT. That's the same everywhere in this country. Incumbency is a huge advantage in such races.

So we have Repubs running scared in Wisconsin, as they should be, and our usual Righties trying to spin it some other way, up to and including pre-emptive attacks of fraud.

In their minds, it must be fraud if they're losing, obviously, because they're oh so right, they just know it...

Then there are comments like this.

It's quite amusing being away from this forum for a length of time, coming back, and reading all the pointless bickering! 😛 If that is your honest assessment, there is something seriously wrong with your thought process 😀

 

[cubby1223]

So, unless she rules the way you think she should rule, she's a bad judge...got it. 🙄

Well that's pretty much how everyone else around here thinks, most likely yourself included, if I searched your post history

 

[fskimospy]

This is another sad chapter in the progression of this country...

Judges should not be political. Not be policy deciders.

But that's what this election represents.

Judging has always had political aspects, ALWAYS. This is nothing new, there's just no way around it. Either you elect them or you appoint them, there's always a political element.

I personally think appointment is better as it keeps judges from having to consider politics after they are appointed.

 

[manimal]

Judging has always had political aspects, ALWAYS. This is nothing new, there's just no way around it. Either you elect them or you appoint them, there's always a political element.

I personally think appointment is better as it keeps judges from having to consider politics after they are appointed.

While I agree with you part of me would love to see what Clarence Thomas vs a wet sock or a dead hooker would do...