"Obama's goose is cooked"

This is what Sarah Palin had to say in the aftermath of the disastrous loss for the Democrat machine after Gov. Scott Walker won his governorship again, despite massive amounts of money and effort from the Democrat machine and all the pressure the Unions could bring to bear.

“I think that the Democrats there understand that the president’s no-show represents the fact that Obama’s goose is cooked,”

This is what Gov. Sarah Palin told Greta Van Susteren last night. She was referring to President Obama’s decision not to campaign for Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett.

Obama didn't want to be contaminated with Barrett's loss after it became clear in polls that he had little chance of pulling off a win, despite last minute desperation allegations of a Walker "love child" out there somewhere.

Palin also said “More and more Americans realize that what Wisconsin has just manifested via this vote … is the complete opposite of what president Obama and the White House represents today.”

Wisconsin election: Sarah Palin:

Scott Walker opponents hit below the belt with apparently false 'love child' rumor | The Daily Caller

Originally Posted by RichieLion

"Obama's goose is cooked"

This is what Sarah Palin had to say in the aftermath of the disastrous loss for the Democrat machine after Gov. Scott Walker won his governorship again, despite massive amounts of money and effort from the Democrat machine and all the pressure the Unions could bring to bear.

“I think that the Democrats there understand that the president’s no-show represents the fact that Obama’s goose is cooked,”

This is what Gov. Sarah Palin told Greta Van Susteren last night. She was referring to President Obama’s decision not to campaign for Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett.

Obama didn't want to be contaminated with Barrett's loss after it became clear in polls that he had little chance of pulling off a win, despite last minute desperation allegations of a Walker "love child" out there somewhere.

Palin also said “More and more Americans realize that what Wisconsin has just manifested via this vote … is the complete opposite of what president Obama and the White House represents today.”

Wisconsin election: Sarah Palin:

Scott Walker opponents hit below the belt with apparently false 'love child' rumor | The Daily Caller

It is all about the money is the message I got from the Wisconsin loss for the Democrats and the unions. Debt and controlling it was the most important point. The 2nd was that money talks louder than anything else.

It is all about the money is the message I got from the Wisconsin loss for the Democrats and the unions. Debt and controlling it was the most important point. The 2nd was that money talks louder than anything else.

And if he had lost and Barrett had won I bet your post would read different.

Something like, This is just a preview of what is to come in November and how strong and popular the unions are.......Hmmmm?

Richie,the people voted and decided to keep Walker. That's fine all was above board. But you can't be satisfied.with a win....you again come up with a half-truth or a little lie.You lead people to believe the big bad Dems were the only side to spend massive money when the TRUTH is the Reps outspent the Dems about 7-1in money. Please look up the "massive" amounts of money spent and where it came from on BOTH SIDES.

Originally Posted by waynet

Richie,the people voted and decided to keep Walker. That's fine all was above board. But you can't be satisfied.with a win....you again come up with a half-truth or a little lie.You lead people to believe the big bad Dems were the only side to spend massive money when the TRUTH is the Reps outspent the Dems about 7-1in money. Please look up the "massive" amounts of money spent and where it came from on BOTH SIDES.

I might add that NONE of this was remotely necessary. This was simply and only a big blow from the unions and nothing more. It was a terrible mistake to undertake this and they were advised by every corner NOT TO DO IT, but they did.

I always try to go back to the seed and in this case it was totally something that came out of the union, was totally union backed and made a political issue. YES.....what a waste....I relate it to the WH wasting an entire year on a disaster of a health bill instead of tackling real problems.

This whole debacle, in my opinion, lies at the feet of the unions !

Originally Posted by waynet

Richie,the people voted and decided to keep Walker. That's fine all was above board. But you can't be satisfied.with a win....you again come up with a half-truth or a little lie.You lead people to believe the big bad Dems were the only side to spend massive money when the TRUTH is the Reps outspent the Dems about 7-1in money. Please look up the "massive" amounts of money spent and where it came from on BOTH SIDES.

If people were "lead to believe" something I didn't say, I don't know how to comment on that. It wasn't my intention. Gov. Scott Walker was on defense.

This whole affair was concocted by the Democrats under the demands of their Union constituency. The Democrats were on offense, in this affair.

It was they who poured money into trying to portray Gov. Walker as some sort of public fiend. They used every backhanded tactic they could think of and portrayed this as a crystal ball, a foretelling of the coming elections in November.

"The people would make their voices heard" they proclaimed in all their "Occupy Wisconsin" hoopla.............. and, sadly for them, in that they were correct.

This was Democrat engineered, Democrat driven; and democratically a total "crash and burn" for the Democrats and especially for the Unions. This was folly for the Unions and sadly (I really mean this) will resonate beyond this election in a demonstration of Union weakness and vulnerability that the Unions in this age can ill afford.

IMHO this was not about who spent the most money but rather a harbinger of things to come. Voters have seized up the issue of "entitlements" whether that be for corporate America via bailouts, etc. individuals who continue to live on the dole and public unions that have over capitalized at taxpayers expense. Voters are quite aware that we face the same problems as Greece, Italy Spain Potrugal, etc if we continue down the road of economic irresponsibility. voters know Congress won't do it unless they receive a serious warning. Wisconsin results was one such notice and as momentum increases, and it will, the narrative will become more focused concerning financial responsibilities by all of us.

the WI results simply reflect what the people desire and bought.....an end to out of control spending.

No different than when the people in the 2007 election bought what Obama was selling.

With one big difference. Walker did what he said he was going to do and delivered on what he promised.

It has more to do with Americans are sick and tired of business as usual politics which Obama and the current congress represent.

As for the money sing song of the day....could those you are opposed to spend enough money to make you vote for them?

The other issue the media is silent on is the number of cross over votes by those who are fed up with Obama and are not party first no matter what followers.

btk

Obama has a 7 point lead over Willard in WI. WI is blue !!!!!

It is curious nobody seems to notice that in WI the Rethugs LOST the State Senate.

Basically, if Walker had any kind of agenda going forward, it i s DOA. From today forward and until he is up for reelection, Walker is a lame duck.

Originally Posted by coralway

Obama has a 7 point lead over Willard in WI. WI is blue !!!!!

It is curious nobody seems to notice that in WI the Rethugs LOST the State Senate.

Basically, if Walker had any kind of agenda going forward, it i s DOA. From today forward and until he is up for reelection, Walker is a lame duck.

Obama's still ahead in the blue state of Wisconsin by a reported 7 pt. margin according to exit polling?

Is this the same state of Wisconsin that he won by 14 pts. in 2008?

I wouldn't claim the Senate yet with a margin of 800 votes. The Republicans won 3 of the 4 seats on the ballot with the last one up in the air at this point. Still even if it turns out the way you like, it's a hollow victory.

Originally Posted by coralway

Obama has a 7 point lead over Willard in WI. WI is blue !!!!!

It is curious nobody seems to notice that in WI the Rethugs LOST the State Senate.

Basically, if Walker had any kind of agenda going forward, it i s DOA. From today forward and until he is up for reelection, Walker is a lame duck.

Obama, Romney Polls Show Candidates Tied In 3 Swing States

polling 6 days ago had the boys even in iowa, colorado and nevada - wll states where obama won in 2008. hmmmmmmmmm

coralway - you often cite recent polling - do you REALLY believe ANY polling done at this time REALLY matters?

Originally Posted by RichieLion

...in the aftermath of the disastrous loss for the Democrat machine after Gov. Scott Walker won his governorship again, despite massive amounts of money and effort from the Democrat machine and all the pressure the Unions could bring to bear....

Not a big deal here, Richie. Walker won the election fair and square.

But to imply that he did so while overcoming a 'massive' effort by the Democrats is a wee bit disingenuous. The facts are that those contributing to Walker's campaign--who are unknown because of the Supreme Court decsion--outspent his opponent, buying mostly attack ads, to the tune of 7-to-1.

If you want to argue about the results of the election, from a money perspective, it wasn't really a fair fight.

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

Not a big deal here, Richie. Walker won the election fair and square.

But to imply that he did so while overcoming a 'massive' effort by the Democrats is a wee bit disingenuous. The facts are that those contributing to Walker's campaign--who are unknown because of the Supreme Court decsion--outspent his opponent, buying mostly attack ads, to the tune of 7-to-1.

If you want to argue about the results of the election, from a money perspective, it wasn't really a fair fight.

You miss my point. I don't care about how much money was spent DEFENDING Gov. Scott Walker.

The Democrats and the Unions picked this fight. They set up the battlefield.

They put everything they had to bear in beating Walker like a drum.

They failed miserably and are "bloody" and reeling, no matter how you or anybody wants to spin it.

The Unions, in a very public way, showed their enemies how weak they are.
This did nothing but hurt the union cause. It's going to be harder to bluff anyone anymore.

The money is the least of it. The Democrats crashed and burned.

Originally Posted by RichieLion

You miss my point. I don't care about how much money was spent DEFENDING Gov. Scott Walker.

The Democrats and the Unions picked this fight. They set up the battlefield.

They put everything they had to bear in beating Walker like a drum.

They failed miserably and are "bloody" and reeling, no matter how you or anybody wants to spin it.

The Unions, in a very public way, showed their enemies how weak they are.
This did nothing but hurt the union cause. It's going to be harder to bluff anyone anymore.

The money is the least of it. The Democrats crashed and burned.

Elections these days are often the result of how much money you raise and spend. Or how much someone else spends in your behalf. You're right; Walker's opponents "put everything they had" into winning the election. It turned out that what they had was nowhere near enough. Walker's supporters and donors from outside Wisconsin outspent his opponent 7 to 1. Mostly in attack ads. To analyze the results of the election without taking that into consideration might feel good...but it's inaccurate.

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

Elections these days are often the result of how much money you raise and spend. Or how much someone else spends in your behalf. You're right; Walker's opponents "put everything they had" into winning the election. It turned out that what they had was nowhere near enough. Walker's supporters and donors from outside Wisconsin outspent his opponent 7 to 1. Mostly in attack ads. To analyze the results of the election without taking that into consideration might feel good...but it's inaccurate.

Can you provide a politically neutral source that supports this assertion? Please include the monies spent by the Democrats in putting this measure on the ballot and the cost to Wisconsin for the strikes and 'sick-outs'.