• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker survives recall effort, NBC News projects

I have no idea what you have been doing to produce such a ridiculous belief. The funding for my job comes from the same sources that fund Republicans in the same positions. CLUE for the CLUELESS: it has nothing to do with unions or union money.

Right, the taxpayers of the state of Michigan
 
How can one "repudiate the numbers" when all they are is numbers without sources to examine?

Last month according to an article in the NY Times that was over 17 million dollars spent on behalf of the unions and then of course there were the non reported dollars spent on behalf of unions. Keep spreading that DNC talking point that this was all about money for that is all you have left.
 
Why would that be a downer, you are absolutely correct as investors invest their own money to make a profit and the Wisconsin results indicate that a strong leader taking action against skyrocketing costs due to union benefits could be an indication that better days are coming. Now we get rid of Obama and really turn the economy around.
Naive viewpoint at best, union benefits simply aren't a driving force for stock oriented decisions by investors (Good ones at least.) You're placing far too much stock (no pun intended) in this win.
 
I hate to be a downer, but something tells me that investors weren't withholding capital awaiting the Wisconsin gubernatorial results.

What point do you hope to make with that drivel ?

On a state level, are you not aware of business fleeing both California and Illlinois, to name two ? Are you aware of what is causing such ? Did you look at the earlier link with regard to business-friendly states, and bother to understand why ? On the national level, are you not aware of the $2 trillion plus sitting on the sidelines, in business coiffures, waiting for an improvement in the business climate, beginning with a government that is more business-friendly ?

Liberals ruin the business environment.
 
Last edited:
Naive viewpoint at best, union benefits simply aren't a driving force for stock oriented decisions by investors (Good ones at least.) You're placing far too much stock (no pun intended) in this win.

Is that right? What is your experience in making that statement? What do expenses have to do with company profits?
 
Naive viewpoint at best, union benefits simply aren't a driving force for stock oriented decisions by investors (Good ones at least.) You're placing far too much stock (no pun intended) in this win.

Folly. Those states with the most onerous public employee unions, and the pension baggage that comes with them, are losing businesses. They are moving to other states. It is not a coincidence.
 
What point do you hope to make with that drivel ?

Liberals ruin the business environment.
Drivel? Nah, just pointing out that the Wisconsin results most likely had very little to zero impact on stocks, the much more plausible explanation would be the fed suggesting further extending monetary easing into the forseeable future. Bank Of America, Morgan Stanley Shares Skyrocket On Hopes Of More Fed Easing - Forbes

Stock market has done just fine under Democrats in general, so why the giant contradiction?
 
Drivel? Nah, just pointing out that the Wisconsin results most likely had very little to zero impact on stocks, the much more plausible explanation would be the fed suggesting further extending monetary easing into the forseeable future. Bank Of America, Morgan Stanley Shares Skyrocket On Hopes Of More Fed Easing - Forbes

Stock market has done just fine under Democrats in general, so why the giant contradiction?

The post you responded to referenced far more than "stocks". It referenced turning the country around, and investment in America. We are in a bit of a bad economic situation nationally, and it ain't the stock market that is the problem.

Further, at state levels we have perfect indicators of what works as a successful business environment, and what does not. If we kick that assclown Obama out of DC in November, maybe we can begin to adapt what works to a national level again. Wisconsin is a perfect microcosm of the fight ahead and the solution needed.
 
i've had this argument with him before, he seems to think that even though the state worker performs a service to earn that money, that the "state"(taxpayers) get to dictate to the individual how they are to spend their paycheck, he believes, even after the money has been paid, the 'taxpayer' has a claim on it.

that argument would stick if the dues actually got the the employee and the went down the line to the unions... but with automatic deductions, unions employees are not in control of that money at any point in time... they have no choice in how to spend that money.
the unions have it set up so that taxpayer money comes directly to them ( and really, yo uare trying to argue that paying taxes is the same as paying for a service?... idiocy)

you are a union employee, you should know this... you don't write monthly checks to the union for your dues, nor do you have that option... that money is beyond your control.
 
What last night showed is that the people support what Walker is doing and that results actually matter. That doesn't bode well for November for Obama because Obama cannot run on his record. Unions wasted millions and millions of dollars to lose in a landslide.

The waste of money was the result of the unions employing bad political strategy, nothing more. Among their tactical failures is the fact that still rely on the (currenty outdated) technique of sponsoring candidates from only one one major political party, instead of both.

Today, modern PACs and corporations always distribute their cash to candidates of both colors in order to ensure their objectives are met in Congress and local legislatures, regardless of the outcome of elections. But unions don't because their leaders are dumb.

If the unions had smart presidents, they would have long ago dumped vast sums of money into Walker's pocket so as to keep him loyal and prevent this catastrophe.

So, in a nutshell, they made their beds by only making one side of the bed, and that's what they slept in.

Case closed.
 
To me it’s a simple case of the people of Wisconsin voicing their opinion, placing their vote, and the results are in. They want to give Walker his term in office. The why and wherefores of what the outcome of the recall election is now a mute point.

The liberals are looking for excuses, so they use the money, which I find a bit hilarious, you don’t see them saying anything about Obama out spending McCain in the presidential election, I guess to them outspending only counts when they get outspent and lose??

The majority of the people in Wisconsin have spoken, had they been dead set against what Walker had done, and is doing, no amount of money would have changed their vote. I don’t live in Wisconsin, so I have no idea what their thinking is, but one can only “think” that the people there have seen something that they want to give a chance to. Because of the recession states are in difficult positions, and hard choices have to be made. Many of these states rode out the good times, spent more then they should have and let things get out of control. I pity a person being elected to make these hard choices , because people aren’t going to like them. I also respect those same people that take them on because in my opinion they are putting their popularity aside and making decisions that are best for their states.

Governor Walker has been in office just over a year now, yet some here are pointing at his record, those same people were defending Obama’s record after one year saying he needed time, again .. I guess it’s only their candidate that should get the time to turn things around. Considering all that has happened in Wisconsin, starting with the walk out by the democrats, the riots that took place, the recall elections of other elected officials, ending in his own recall election. I can’t see anyone pointing to his record and calling it good or bad …… Now he will have 3 years to see and be judged on . It will be the people of Wisconsin that will judge him, not some right or left winger here.
 
The post you responded to referenced far more than "stocks". It referenced turning the country around, and investment in America. We are in a bit of a bad economic situation nationally, and it ain't the stock market that is the problem.

Further, at state levels we have perfect indicators of what works as a successful business environment, and what does not. If we kick that assclown Obama out of DC in November, maybe we can begin to adapt what works to a national level again. Wisconsin is a perfect microcosm of the fight ahead and the solution needed.
I was discussing stocks, you claimed that business friendly environments yielded better results in the stock market, claimed that Obama was anti business and that Democrats "ruin the business environment" yet ignored the sizable increase under Obama thus far. I'm not in any way shape or form attributing the uptick in the last 3 1/2 years to Obama's policies, but the sheer correlation kinda destroys your own argument.
 
If Obama can blame Bush, why can't Walker? He has been WI governor for 1.5 years and has yet to turn the state's economy around. I am turely SHOCKED, not! Please explain why he had over a $3 billion deficit when he statred and now has barely over $1 million deficit to deal with. Was WI in better shape BEFORE governor Walker? Hmm...
You DO get that Im not blaming Walker...Im actually pointing out that there IS in fact more to this than good party bad party and that ideologues continue to just spout mindless party rhetoric and that helps nothing. You get that...right?
 
You continue to miss the point, I have no problem with private sector unions, my issue is with public unions and funding for those unions. All pay and benefits since they come from the taxpayers should be determined by the taxpayers at the ballot box.

There also is no question that once the money comes from the taxpayer it becomes the union employee but that misses the point totally. Where does that money come from if not the taxpayer?


No, the taxpayer has no right to tell that person what to do with their money. No more than your boss has a right to tell you what to do with your paycheck. Why is it hard to understand?
 
You DO get that Im not blaming Walker...Im actually pointing out that there IS in fact more to this than good party bad party and that ideologues continue to just spout mindless party rhetoric and that helps nothing. You get that...right?

If people didn't come on here and spout mindless party rhetoric, this site would be dead in a week. :(

So we'll have more fun if we argue about whether this is a bellweather for the Republicans, and if Obama wouldn't be better off just resigning now so Romney can pick out the upholstery for the Oval Office.
 
No, the taxpayer has no right to tell that person what to do with their money. No more than your boss has a right to tell you what to do with your paycheck. Why is it hard to understand?

The taxpayer has a right to tell the employee what they are willing to pay them and that is the point.
 
If people didn't come on here and spout mindless party rhetoric, this site would be dead in a week. :(

So we'll have more fun if we argue about whether this is a bellweather for the Republicans, and if Obama wouldn't be better off just resigning now so Romney can pick out the upholstery for the Oval Office.
**** it...Blame Canada!
 
I was discussing stocks, you claimed that business friendly environments yielded better results in the stock market, claimed that Obama was anti business and that Democrats "ruin the business environment" yet ignored the sizable increase under Obama thus far. I'm not in any way shape or form attributing the uptick in the last 3 1/2 years to Obama's policies, but the sheer correlation kinda destroys your own argument.

Business friendly environments DO yield better results in the stock market, the ONLY reason Wallstreet is doing so well is because the government bailed them out with TRILLIONS of dollars in funding. Wallstreet is on a bubble right now based on government spending, it will all come crashing down when Europe gets in trouble and of course, with no money for bailouts the Wallstreet gains will come back down.
 
If people didn't come on here and spout mindless party rhetoric, this site would be dead in a week. :(

So we'll have more fun if we argue about whether this is a bellweather for the Republicans, and if Obama wouldn't be better off just resigning now so Romney can pick out the upholstery for the Oval Office.
To me it is very sad that we are left with those two primary options (Im very encouraged to see Gary Johnson taking the lead as the nominee for the Libertarian ticket. That MAY actually make things interesting). Of the two major parties I can think of three people (Clinton-D, Powell-C, Hunstman-R) that would actually make a positive difference for the country. Instead...holy ****. Those two...and a 'supporting' cast in congress.

Fear and tremble...the Mayans may have been on to something...
 
Business friendly environments DO yield better results in the stock market, the ONLY reason Wallstreet is doing so well is because the government bailed them out with TRILLIONS of dollars in funding. Wallstreet is on a bubble right now based on government spending, it will all come crashing down when Europe gets in trouble and of course, with no money for bailouts the Wallstreet gains will come back down.

Plus extremely low interest rates and companies make money using those low rates.
 
This issue was a huge waster of our time and money. Both politicians should be ashamed of their immaturity and their smear campaigns. Barrett especially with his "Scott Walker is a rock star" gimmicky attacks. All of this time and energy was wasted, over $50,000,000 spent, for nothing.

Both politicians don't seem to give a damn about the rest of us. They seem far more content to waste money to keep themselves and their party members in power.

The only good thing about this drama is its end.
 
This issue was a huge waster of our time and money. Both politicians should be ashamed of their immaturity and their smear campaigns. Barrett especially with his "Scott Walker is a rock star" gimmicky attacks. All of this time and energy was wasted, over $50,000,000 spent, for nothing.

Both politicians don't seem to give a damn about the rest of us. They seem far more content to waste money to keep themselves and their party members in power.

The only good thing about this drama is its end.

What exactly should Walker have done? He didn't initiate the recall!
 
What exactly should Walker have done? He didn't initiate the recall!

That means nothing. It was still a major waste of our time and money.
 
To me it is very sad that we are left with those two primary options (Im very encouraged to see Gary Johnson taking the lead as the nominee for the Libertarian ticket. That MAY actually make things interesting). Of the two major parties I can think of three people (Clinton-D, Powell-C, Hunstman-R) that would actually make a positive difference for the country. Instead...holy ****. Those two...and a 'supporting' cast in congress.

Fear and tremble...the Mayans may have been on to something...

Any of those three that you mentioned would be a better President than Obama or Romney. Much better.
 
Back
Top Bottom