Posted on 06/06/2012 3:40:42 AM PDT by Colonel Kangaroo
CBS News) Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker retained his seat in the election that sought to recall him from office, defeating his challenger Tom Barrett in this election (as he did in the 2010 governor's race). Walker won with strong support from Republicans, conservatives, Tea Party supporters and a majority of votes from independents.
Walker is the first governor in U.S. history to survive a recall election. Gov. Gray Davis of California was recalled in 2003, and in 1921, North Dakota's Governor Lynn Frazier of was ousted due to a recall.
The heated recall race began amid the controversy created when Walker released a state budget proposal that included limiting the collective bargaining rights for public union workers. In response, large demonstrations protesting Walker's plan took place at the state capital building which eventually led to a recall effort. Voters who turned out for this election narrowly supported Walker's handling of the collective bargaining issue: 52 percent approved, and 47 percent disapproved.
Scott Walker wins Wisconsin recall election
Voters were similarly divided when asked about the state law that limited the collective bargaining rights of government workers: 52 percent approved, and 47 percent disapproved.
As expected, those voters who approved of Walker's policies voted overwhelmingly for the governor. Opponents of his policies backed Barrett, the Democrat.
Wisconsin voters were also split in their views of unions for government workers. According to exit polls, 51 percent said they viewed these unions favorably; slightly fewer - 45 percent - held unfavorable opinions.
Walker promised to create 250,000 private-sector jobs in Wisconsin by 2015. According to an April analysis by Politifact, 5,900 jobs have been created since Walker took office. Still, 54 percent of those who voted in the recall election approved of how Walker has handled job creation, while 45 percent disapproved.
Wisconsin voters had strong opinions on the merit of recall elections. Sixty percent told exit pollsters that recall elections are only appropriate when there has been official misconduct, and another 10 percent think such elections are never appropriate. Just 27 percent of Wisconsin voters supported holding recall elections for any reason.
Minds were made up about this race long ago. Remarkably, just 8 percent of Wisconsin voters decided on their candidate in the last few days; more than nine in 10 made up their minds before that.
Can Romney capitalize on Scott Walker's win?
Looking Ahead to November
Both presidential candidates will be targeting the battleground state of Wisconsin this year. Among Wisconsin voters who went to the polls in the recall election, 51 percent said if the presidential election were held today they would vote for President Obama, while 44 percent would back Republican Mitt Romney. Still, with five months to go until the presidential election, it's hard to say what the November electorate in Wisconsin will look like this far out. Mr. Obama beat John McCain by 14 points in Wisconsin in 2008.
At this point, nearly all Barrett voters (92 percent) would support President Obama in the fall, while fewer - 76 percent- of Walker voters plan to back the Republican, Mitt Romney. Seventeen percent of Walker's supporters said if the presidential election were held today they would vote for President Obama.
Voters in Wisconsin also give President Obama the edge on improving the economy -- 42 percent said he would do a better job on that issue, compared to 38 percent who picked Romney. By a wider margin, voters said the president would do a better job helping the middle class (46 percent), while fewer (37 percent) gave Romney the upper hand on that.
The economy will surely be on the minds of Wisconsin voters come November. Thirty-six percent of voters in the recall election said their family's financial situation is worse compared to two years ago - nearly twice as many as said better. Forty-four percent said their family finances are the same.
Demographic Groups
Both candidates received support from similar types of voters as they did in 2010, when they first ran against each other. Women and lower income voters supported Barrett, while men and those with higher incomes voted for Walker.
Votes also fell along partisan lines: 94 percent of Republicans backed Walker, as did 86 percent of conservatives. Barrett received similarly strong support from Democrats (91 percent) and liberals (86 percent).
But independents gave an edge to Walker, giving him 54 percent of their votes compared to 45 percent for Barrett. That is similar to 2010, when Walker received the votes of 56 percent of independents, and Barrett 42 percent.
Thirty-six percent of voters said they are supporters of the Tea Party movement; and 93 percent of them also cast their ballot for Walker.
Turnout was up among one group of voters. Households with a union member comprised 33 percent of voters - up from 2010 and 2008, when 26 percent of voters said there was a union member in their household. Majorities of voters living in a union household (62 percent), and most union members themselves (71 percent), voted for Barrett.
Barrett also took most of the moderate vote: 44 percent of Wisconsin's voters described themselves as moderate, and Barrett received 54 percent of their support.
Both candidates retained most of their support from the 2010 governor's race. Ninety-four percent of those who said they voted for Barrett in 2010 voted for him again this year, and 94 percent of those who said they supported Walker two years ago voted for him this year as well.
Barrett's support was as much an anti-Walker vote it was a vote for Barrett himself. Fifty percent of Barrett's voters said they were voting for Barrett, but another 47 percent characterized their vote as against his opponent Scott Walker.
Among Walker's backers, 88 percent said they were voting for their candidate, not against his opponent.
This is why the unions so want to end secret ballots ("Card Check").
It's also why the "exit polls" (a ridiculous term that makes them sound far more official than the media stunts they actually are) were so wrong. Who's going to publicly state that they voted against the unions when gangs of union thugs are standing around listening to every word?
“I thought all union members were thugs.”
IMO, it may be the folks who resented union dues deducted from their pay checks.
In a forced union state you’re going to get a sizable number of conservative leaning union members. In Michigan, the Union Conservatives openly support right to work legislation and have even testified against union political fundraising on capitol hill.
http://www.unionconservatives.com/
I suspect that nearly every Michigan FReeper has been a union member at some point. I was AFL-CIO myself and hated it.
Union membership, by and large, are not thugs. But when the membership in the union becomes mandatory, as it was with many state and local government offices throughout Wisconsin, then the thugs get into control, and use the fear and intimidation tactics to keep the membership in line. The rare instances when an internal reform candidate attempts to challenge the established thugs, bad things happen to him, his family, and his reputation, and the unfortunate one is chased from what should have been a secure position. Not by management, but by supposed peers.
Truly a Wild West situation, where the toughest outlaw of all was made sheriff, to keep the other thugs in line, but also resist any attempts at reform by the non-thug populace.
Quite simple...public employees should have no better benefits and perks than those of their employers , We the People.
It was positively annoying reading all of the “Unions are busing in members to cast fake votes” conspiracy posts yesterday.
People on our side still fear those goons and act like they are these supermen that can sway election! They are just loud-mouth apes, people!
Quite true, but that doesn't make them thugs or change the fact that a lot of them work hard and do their best on the job and that many have very conservative instincts. When I worked at the US Postal Service in the 1980s, I'd say that most of my union coworkers I knew well were strong Reagan supporters.
Lots of times, unions use hired guns rather than rank and file. When I was union, we never talked about politics in our shop. You also have to separate urban from rural members along the usual lines.
Personally I think we need to drive a wedge between public and private sector unions. After all, public sector unions cost jobs both union and non union. There are obvious problems with private sector unions but nothing like the public sector. Besides, I’m not so sure public sector unions are quite constitutional.
“Voters in Wisconsin also give President Obama the edge on improving the economy “
Say what?
Politics of it is irrelevant....it’s a practical, financial reality. They cannot exist without a financially healthy private sector. Overpaying and over benefitting is a prescription for bankruptcy in any industry, anywhere, anytime.
The Laws of Economics...in the end are Laws of Mathematics and .....reality.
when I was working for the state, we had to sit through an initiation talk from a union rep. I pretended to listen and trashed the handouts asap
Personally I think we need to drive a wedge between public and private sector unions. After all, public sector unions cost jobs both union and non union. There are obvious problems with private sector unions but nothing like the public sector. Besides, I’m not so sure public sector unions are quite constitutional.
I think a lot of the danger is lessened if the right to strike is not given to public employee unions. The three big postal unions, APWU, NALC and Mailhandlers, are not allowed to strike by law.
What a total surprise! I am totally amazed. Indeed, I am flabbergasted! In fact, I cannot remember a time when my flabber has ever been more gasted!
This idiot actually gets paid to write drivel like this?
Dang... 71% of Wisconsin union members are marxists... lots of work left to do.
LLS
Further proof that Obama has lost the private sector union vote.
First, Obama has demonstrated, again, that he is a failed leader because he would not come to Wisconsin.
Second, Obama’s stimulus, for “shovel-ready” jobs for unions, ended up going to public-sector unions while private-sector unions got few projects.
Lastly, Obama’s economy has been abysmal for private-sector unions with their membership declining even further.
Any private-sector union that backs Obama after this debacle risks a revolt from its membership.
But considering that 100% of them were being bombarded with propaganda that a vote for Walker was a vote for their own ruination, I find the results heartening. We need to value everybody who supports the cause. Anybody who votes against their generally accepted self-interest for the common good is a hero and patriot in my book, even public sector union members.
You’re looking at things from the perspective of a postal worker which isn’t quite the same as a teacher, cop, or fireman. Kind of a strange no man’s land that isn’t quite public and isn’t quite private.
Personally I think the postal service and their unions would be better off if they were let off the government leash.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.