…now anti-gay bigot. What happened to Wisconsin that they re-elected this guy? Any Wisconsinites have an explanation?
My former colleagues at another university in Middle East have also been moved to online teaching indefinitely, with the students…
8 responses to “Scott Walker, union buster and…”
-
Democrats fielded weak candidates in both gov elections. Recall campaign failed because many people who oppose SW nonetheless felt the recall was not the way to undo the election. He successfully demonized teachers and other public employees as parasites on the system, unmerited pensions long term drag on state finances. Newspapers in Madison and Milwaukee are politically conservative. He has been given an ALEC playbook and follows it closely. He lies, e.g., about what he has "accomplished" in WI when campaigning in Iowa. He is good looking; voters love that. ALEC battle plan very successful formula, portable to every state with Rep gov and control of state legislatures (e.g., North Carolina). Attacks on public universities like UW: the only institution they don't control yet, liberalizing effects of education are real, must be stopped. Professors can be demonized the same way the K-12 teachers were: lazy, only work part time, etc. I think the chickens are coming home to roost: undereducated population, people whose ideas are formulated by what they hear (on fake news) rather than what they read, easily mislead.
-
Unfortunately, that sounds like a very plausible analysis of the situation.
-
#1 has the basics right. It should be emphasized that, by my reckoning at least, maybe the main reason the recall didn't work was because the Democrats were so inept: they nominated the same weak candidate that ran the first time (reinforcing the "undo the election" narrative #1 mentions); and, what's worse, they ran it like a conventional (non-recall) campaign–backgrounding, almost to the point of invisibility, the reason for the recall, viz. Act 10 (the union-busting bill that set everything in motion), and simply re-hashing the original campaign. Ugh. Voters need extraordinary reasons to undo a recent election. Walker's actions were egregious to an extraordinary degree (he didn't run on a plan to destroy public-sector unions; Act 10 was a complete surprise), but the Democrats didn't focus on that at all during the recall election. They just re-played the previous Novembers debates.
Finally, a quibble with #1's analysis: Walker is "good looking"? Are you kidding me? He looks like a hobo from a Bugs Bunny cartoon. Combine that with his nasally voice and total lack of charisma… I'm frankly mystified by this guy's political success.
-
Based on what I've seen in the news recently, Walker must be sharing notes with Jindal. Massive cuts to higher education? Check. Bizarre obsession with the behaviors of homosexuals within their respective states? Check. Politicizing personal religious views? Check. Incoherent, false, and misleading comments on Islam? Check. Denying good climate science and evolutionary biology in order to appease a scientifically illiterate voter base? Check. Damaging their respective states seemingly irreparably in so as to flaunt certain conservative credentials on the national stage? Check. And both may be poised to make a run for the presidency. Heaven, help us.
-
Two corrections to earlier post. Yes, the Dems ran the same weak candidate both times and the campaigns were weak. This is a better, non-iphone version of the last line: poorly educated population, people whose ideas are based on what they hear (on fake news) rather than what they read, highly vulnerable to relentless barrage of misinformation.
-
How can you even call yourself a Nietzschean with such passe political views? Christ, you're boring.
BL COMMENT: I missed the bit in Nietzsche which endorsed anti-gay bigotry, I guess. Plus, of course, Nietzsche didn't want disciples, you know?
-
The article in question is dated : Tuesday, May 17, 2011.
-
Walker's team gets the demographics right: energize the conservative base socially and use the politics of resentment to pull in as many independents as possible economically. The demonization of unions and state workers–especially the university–as "haves" who make too much, work too little, and get benefits that middle class workers have lost (largely due to the late-90s tech bubble and later recession abetted by anti-regulatory legislation and socially apathetic political inaction dating back to Ronnie) has resonated much more than any messages about income inequality and the like. But even the most apologetic plutocrats now are lip-servicing "opportunities" for the poor (note–not providing actual means like redistribution of wealth, mind you), and so their mouths are trying to become adept at giving-you-the-right-to-work (no union dues!) loudly on one side while whispering we-have-your-back to the 1% employers (so you can hold workers' wages down). The added value of crushing public K-12 and higher ed is that these self-serving economically unjust policies of the 1% might thus have some legs for generating future generations of blind and loyal servants.
Leave a Reply