The next lefty molehill

You know, when the local rag proclaims “Walker wins” or something to that likeness on the front page of the paper, you’d think they’d take a few minutes to lick their wounds. Oh, no. They’re off to the next thing. They have decided the next thing is recall elections, and in particular, they are singularly focused on one Republican Senator, Randy Hopper from Fond du Lac. He’s been poking out of bounds, they say, and Republicans should be outraged, I tell you!

Well let me explain. If there’s one thing Wisconsin Republicans care very little about vetting it is politicians known to poke outside the marriage. I can give you a list both elected and past, male and female, who have no problem with their reputation to play at will. Let me also explain that family values thing the left wants to roll out again was abandoned about a decade ago. It won’t work to call attention to it now.

What’s really at play? Hopper has been identified as a weak Republican. He represents a district that harbors a number of union members. He voted to support Walker’s recent move to change state worker bargaining despite the union effort to change his mind.

In other words, they don’t like him much.

We’ll see where it all goes. I predict that in all the recall efforts, one Dem will go Republican, with exactly one Republican seat going Democrat. You know how I feel about it all. Sit back and let it play out without throwing your money at it. Let those tortured souls who just “lost” so much money out of the recent changes throw even more at their union organizers. You can laugh all the way to the bank.

Besides, even if they turned the Senate in the recall efforts, what’s done is done. It won’t be successfully challenged, and it won’t be undone without a full D, D, D reversal.

And that won’t happen for a long, long time.


  1. The point I would like to see investigated is whether Sen. Hopper actually has a residence in-district. I would love to see the (R)s try to justify that. As for predictions, I’ll pick a net loss of 2 for the (R)s.

  2. Residency is a legal term, and I bet he’s watching the specifics to make sure he qualifies. A net loss of two Republicans will make it close, but will not change the outcome. It just means they’ll have to ride Schultz harder to keep him in line.

    But I still say net zero.

  3. Its the right wing spending the most $ on ad buys. All I’m donating is time and shoe leather. Not all recalled Senators will lose their recall elections, true. But they all will have to endure them, and this will go on for a long while.

  4. It is? I mean, it’s such a non-partisan link and all, I’m sure you’ve told the entire story.

    Hey, you’re doing more for your side than I am. At least you are using large muscle groups. I’m just typing. 🙂

  5. interesting says:

    It will surely be decided in 2012…especially if the Dems/Unions can keep the message alive. Don’t know if Walker will be able to overcome all the mistakes he has made in the first 3 months of office.

  6. Cindy

    10 years since gop ran on family values?

    really you are turning into fred @rdw or kev@ll by just posting outright lies!

    check out the” rebecca for real” campaign, especially the primary against b davis!

    she was the christ centered candidate if i recall her mantra!

    i use her as an example, because she to, has been poking around out of bounds, and figure this way you’ll be ready when it hits the news!

  7. Rebeccal Kleefisch is the entire GOP?

    I’ll stand by my comment.

  8. Randy in Richmond says:

    Since I don’t live in Wisconsin, could you please provide some of “all the mistakes” Walker has made. Thanks

  9. J. Strupp says:

    O.K. someone help me out. I’m not a political science guy. My question is this:

    If we elect someone to office and he or she doesn’t commit any violation of law in voting for or against a given bill, why is it legal to recall this person? I guess I just don’t understand. If you get elected, that should be it. You’re in office and you get to vote for whatever the heck you want because the people put you there. If you don’t like what your representative is doing, vote their rear end out of office at the end of the term, right?

    How is it that we allow “do overs” of elected officials because some people don’t like what they voted for.

    How exactly did the state (or federal) government decide that this kind of thing should be allowed? It just seems to run contrary to a representative democracy.

  10. Well, it’s always been there. It’s amusing to watch a group call to arms in hopes of turning the tide. Right now it’s just talk. The hurdle is high to make it happen, but darn it, they are going to try. I suspect it will all die a natural death, but we’ll see.

    There are specific rules for time to collect the signatures and who can collect the signatures. I can’t even find where anyone’s started the paperwork, but I haven’t looked very closely.

    This might help:

  11. fred…i mean cindy…

    i rarely see you let your views get in the way of your posts.

    but darling and kapanke will 100% sure have a recall election..your’e right…they may indeed win. but do even a little research or talk to those in the know and they are already giving up any hope of not having to go to elections on those 2!!

  12. Ok, Stan. Show me where to go to prove that Darling and Kapanke will face recall elections. And if Darling and Kapanke maintain their positions, won’t that be a remarkable waste of local resources.

  13. interesting says:

    He has not done a very good job of “selling” the bill. There are some questions that are legitimate that he has never answered. Why are the Police and Fire Unions exempt from this? Everyone knew he would ask for financial concessions from the unions but can’t find any evidence of him broaching the subject of CB during his campaign. I think he could have got the health and pension issues at first and then gone after CB once he gained some momentum. Just a thought…