hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 11 Mar, 2011 04:11 am
@failures art,
Quote:
This could have gone poorly for the Dems, but the simple truth is that public opinion sided with the Dems for leaving the state and gave the public the chance to voice themselves
You did not actually read the polls did you...all of the polls I saw had the majority against the dems leaving the state.
Quote:
67% of likely voters oppose Wisconsin Democrat senators’ tactic of leaving the state to prevent the legislature from voting on a bill to curb pay, perks and power of government-sector unions, according to a new national Rasmussen poll. Just 25% of likely voters support the Democratic lawmakers’ move.
http://www.daily-news-trends.com/news-2/67-of-voters-oppose-wisconsin-democrats-leaving-state/

THat the majority wanted the GOP to take no action against the unions is an assertion that you are prepared to back up I hope......
failures art
 
  2  
Reply Fri 11 Mar, 2011 04:16 am
@hawkeye10,
Citing a national Rassmusen poll is alright, but I was talking about the opinions of the citizens of WI specifically. These polls have already been posted in this thread (Cyclo posted at least three I believe). I'm not going to go to the effort to track down polls you didn't care to pay attention to the first time. Chances of you understanding them the second time around is not worth my time or effort.

A
R
T
MontereyJack
 
  2  
Reply Fri 11 Mar, 2011 04:18 am
Take a look at the Bloomberg poll at PollingReport.com. Its formatting won't translate to a2k, but the public heavily favors unions, and not Scott.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 11 Mar, 2011 04:22 am
@failures art,
Quote:
Q28. Do you approve or disapprove of Senate Democrats' decision to leave the state in order to prevent
the passage of the budget repair bill that would reduce public employee benefits and change collective
bargaining rights?
Strongly approve .................................................... 36
Somewhat approve ................................................. 11
Somewhat disapprove .............................................. 9
Strongly disapprove ............................................... 42
Don't know / Refused............................................... 2

http://www.wpri.org/polls/March2011/ToplinesWPRIFebMar%202011.pdf

Wisconsin Study Methodology
WPRI
February 2011

This study comprised a representative sample of 603 Wisconsin Adults Age 18 and over and was conducted from February 27 to March 1 of 201

I get 47% approve and 51% disapprove of the Dems taking off......what do you get? This does not support your assertion "the simple truth is that public opinion sided with the Dems for leaving the state and gave the public the chance to voice themselves" Even moving the goal posts and now claiming that you were only speaking of the opinion of Wisconsin citizens will not save you, because your assertion was biased Bullshit not grounded in reality.
failures art
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Mar, 2011 04:31 am
@hawkeye10,
Not bad hawkeye10. How deep did you read into your own source?

Try Q: 9, 10, 11a, 11b, 12a, 12b, 14, 15

Compared against the popularity of Walker or State GOP, the State Dems are winning the popularity war. I guess you never got around to posting that... Cool

That fact is that the public only had a chance to know what was going on because the Dems left. I'm sure the Democrats in the state didn't want to leave, but the GOP was moving as fast as they could to prevent the public from knowing what they were doing.

A
R
T
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Fri 11 Mar, 2011 04:39 am
@failures art,
Quote:
Compared against the popularity of Walker or State GOP, the State Dems are winning the popularity war
This was not your assertion, you claimed that "public opinion" approved of the dems leaving the state, which I have documented as a false assertion, and for which you have documented no corroboration for. You are not very good at this, are you.....
failures art
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Mar, 2011 06:46 am
@hawkeye10,
I'm saying that public opinion of the Dems could have gone south and that the public was not in favor of this bill. I think it's fair to concede that the Dems leaving the state itself may have been unpopular by a small margin, but that alone is unresolvable with your own source when compared to all other responses regarding this. It seems of the the sample taken, people may have not wanted th Dems to break quorum, but stood firmly against Walker's bill, and that in the end, Walker and state GOP poll poorly in popularity in comparison to their Democratic rivals.

What can be drawn from this? If we want to say that breaking quorum wasn't 1:1 with democratic approval, that's fine. It seems however, that the Dems were expected to do something and people didn't want this bill. That's the reality.

Your source. So we can discuss to whatever detail you wish. Whether the public liked them leaving as much as they approve of them is analysis worth looking at yes? Certainly the poll's own numbers on the bill itself is relevant to you?

A
R
T
0 Replies
 
revelette
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Mar, 2011 07:01 am
Quote:
Last night, Wisconsin Senate Republicans abandoned any remaining pretenses that a bill stripping state workers of their collective bargaining rights has anything whatsoever to do with the state’s finances, and rammed the bill through the senate without any Democrats present. Yet even if Gov. Scott Walker (R) succeeds in signing this bill into law, Wisconsin voters have the power to ensure that his victory is short lived.

First, a broad coalition of these voters are circulating petitions to recall the eight GOP state senators who are currently eligible to be removed from office. If just three of these seats are flipped to the Democrats, the GOP will lose control of the state’s upper house.

Second, because Wisconsin law allows any elected official to be recalled after they have served one full year of their term in office, all remaining state legislators and Gov. Walker will be eligible for a recall election next January. If Wisconsin voters wage a successful campaign to fire the state’s anti-worker lawmakers, this bill could be repealed as soon as the snow starts to melt in spring of 2012.

Third, Wisconsin also has the power to ensure that no future lawmakers can repeat Walker’s assault on working familes:

Constitutional amendments. SECTION 1. Any amendment or amendments to this constitution may be proposed in either house of the legislature, and if the same shall be agreed to by a majority of the members elected to each of the two houses…and if, in the legislature so next chosen, such proposed amendment or amendments shall be agreed to by a majority of all the members elected to each house, then it shall be the duty of the legislature to submit such proposed amendment or amendments to the people in such manner and at such time as the legislature shall prescribe; and if the people shall approve and ratify such amendment or amendments by a majority of the electors voting thereon, such amendment or amendments shall become part of the constitution

In other words, the Wisconsin Constitution can be amended in a three step process: 1) the current legislature must approve the amendment; 2) after the next election, the new legislature must approve the amendment; 3) the voters must ratify the amendment by a majority vote. Under this procedure, Wisconsin could amend its constitution to permanently protect working families as soon as 2013.

In Ohio, pro-worker lawmakers are already planning a ballot referendum to overrule an anti-worker bill that is moving forward in that state. Wisconsin law will require working families and their supporters to jump through a few more hoops to reverse Walker’s actions. Nevertheless, they unambiguously have the power to repeal Walker’s bill in 2012 and to ensure that similar bills can never become law again in 2013.


The source of this is highly progressive however it does have linksto back up the facts.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  2  
Reply Fri 11 Mar, 2011 07:13 am
From "Thom's blog:"

18 State Senators undid fifty years of civil rights in Wisconsin
Late last night - Governor Scott Walker and Republicans in Wisconsin proved to the world what we all suspected - that their union-stripping agenda has absolutely NOTHING to do with the budget. With Democrats still AWOL and public opinion turning against him - Walker used the nuclear option. Senate Republicans convened a special session last night - and stripped the budget bill of all the stuff related to an actual budget so that they could pass it without the necessary quorum of Democrats.

The resulting bill was pretty much nothing more than to screw over public unions - including stripping most of their collective bargaining rights away - and to sell off public utilities and defund women's health services. Republicans passed the bill by a vote of 18-1 - with no Democrats present. As one of the filibustering Democratic senators - Chris Larson - said about the move last night - it, "obviously wasn't about any kind of financing, it was an attack on working families." And Senate Minority Leader Mark Miller said, "In thirty minutes, 18 State Senators undid fifty years of civil rights in Wisconsin."

The state capital in Madison was loaded with thousands of protestors at the time of the vote. People who saw the democratic process crumble right before their eyes as the their voices were silenced by Republican back-room deals and parliamentary maneuvers. Massive labor protests outside the capital are planned for today and this weekend - and there at talks of labor strikes.

For the Republicans - all along - it was never about the budget - it was about enacting one-party rule in America, and handing over our nation to billionaires and transnational corporations. In fact - Wisconsin Republican state Senator Scott Fitzgerald admitted that fact in an interview on television yesterday when he said they were doing this to make it harder for Obama to win Wisconsin in 2012.

-Thom
plainoldme
 
  0  
Reply Fri 11 Mar, 2011 07:16 am
@plainoldme,
I've posted several times over the years, a conversation I had with the mother of a high school classmate at the time she and I were about to graduate from college,the spring of 1969.

The woman said that she hoped the fascists -- as she referred to the right as it was at the time -- would take over. She felt that fewer than 10 years of repression of the sort that walker is enforcing would mean an over-throw with the result of freedom, human progress and thinking forever.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  2  
Reply Fri 11 Mar, 2011 08:01 am
@georgeob1,
Which law do you propose made that illegal george?

Or are you having problems understanding what illegal means?
parados
 
  2  
Reply Fri 11 Mar, 2011 08:02 am
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

If it's illegal, they can take legal action, can't they?

And that process has been started. We shall see..

I am curious as to why it was an emergency as claimed by one GOP Senator.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Mar, 2011 08:34 am
This could be the first real test of how Wi voters feel about the issue, unless recall petitions are completed early.

Quote:
With just 3½ weeks before the election for Milwaukee County executive, Rep. Jeff Stone has a major problem.

His name: Gov. Scott Walker.

Stone has stood with the first-term governor, distanced himself from Walker and then cozied up to him once again.

And that's been in just the past two weeks.

Now Stone's county exec opponent, millionaire philanthropist Chris Abele, will try to exploit the long-standing links between Stone and the state's increasingly controversial and polarizing chief executive.

more at-
http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/noquarter/117781588.html
0 Replies
 
RABEL222
 
  0  
Reply Fri 11 Mar, 2011 09:16 am
@cicerone imposter,

Right up to the time cops start useing billy clubs to hold down descent by order of the governor.
0 Replies
 
RABEL222
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Mar, 2011 09:24 am
@failures art,
Since I am an a voting U.S.citizen with the attention span of a 6 year old remind me who won Hector or Achilles?
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Mar, 2011 11:01 am
@parados,
parados wrote:

Which law do you propose made that illegal george?

Or are you having problems understanding what illegal means?


The Democrat Senators in question fled the state jurisdiction precisely because the state police were empowered by law to physically deliver them to the State Legislature so they could perform the duties for which they were elected and are still being paid. --- That law.

You are an ass.
Cycloptichorn
 
  2  
Reply Fri 11 Mar, 2011 11:06 am
@georgeob1,
georgeob1 wrote:

parados wrote:

Which law do you propose made that illegal george?

Or are you having problems understanding what illegal means?


The Democrat Senators in question fled the state jurisdiction precisely because the state police were empowered by law to physically deliver them to the State Legislature so they could perform the duties for which they were elected and are still being paid. --- That law.


But, it's not illegal for them to travel to another state to avoid the police. So it's difficult to say that they broke any law at all there.

Quote:
You are an ass.


Now, now. I don't think you are taking this criticism with a modicum of grace and sportsmanship, at all.

I get why you don't like Parados - he reveals, all the time, that you play very fast and loose with things like facts and evidence in your posts. I can see how that would get annoying. But it has been my long experience here on A2K that the things he points out regarding your and other people's posts are generally quite accurate.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Mar, 2011 11:45 am
Scott Walker seems to have been paying attention to Ed Rendell's advise on political leadership

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/video/2011/02/22/VI2011022205142.html
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  2  
Reply Fri 11 Mar, 2011 11:46 am
@georgeob1,
georgeob1 wrote:


The Democrat Senators in question fled the state jurisdiction precisely because the state police were empowered by law to physically deliver them to the State Legislature so they could perform the duties for which they were elected and are still being paid. --- That law.

You are an ass.

Which law?
The state Constitution prohibits the arrest of legislators while in session unless they're suspected of committing felonies, treason or breach of the peace.
Wisconsin Constitution Art IV Section 15 -
Quote:
Exemption from arrest and civil process. SECTION 15.
Members of the legislature shall in all cases, except treason, fel-
ony and breach of the peace, be privileged from arrest; nor shall
they be subject to any civil process, during the session of the leg-
islature, nor for fifteen days next before the commencement and
after the termination of each session.


The only ass seems to be you george for assuming something is illegal just because you want to believe it.

I heard the troopers say they could not compel them to do anything under the law. It doesn't matter that the GOP ignored the Wisconsin Constitution to try to compel the troopers to do something that would be illegal for law enforcement to do.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Mar, 2011 11:50 am
@parados,
Quote:
I heard the troopers say they could not compel them to do anything under the law. It doesn't matter that the GOP ignored the Wisconsin Constitution to try to compel the troopers to do something that would be illegal for law enforcement to do.


In fact it likely to had been kidnapping and false imprisonment under the color of law.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/20/2024 at 03:58:05