Second, Pasch's platform was wishy-washy talk mostly about not losing more ground, and very very little discussion of any positive agenda. There was an inherent agenda in how she framed what shouldn't be lost by fighting the Republican attack, but Doug is right, she did very little to no discussion of collective bargaining issues...merely about the "need to support our teachers and education." And a really annoying tact was her repeated statements that "Darling has changed, she no longer represents us." HUH?! What kind of nonsense is that? When did she ever represent anyone but River Hills and Mequon wealthy conservatives? That has been her agenda all along.
But Pasch did have a genuine grassroots activist base getting out and supporting her. There were 70 people at any time in the offices and I can only guess how many were out on the streets. I went by Darlings headquarters on election day and it was almost empty...she won by top down corporate activism and disciplined conservatives galvanized by their churches and their more disciplined personality types and such.
-----Original Message----- From: lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org [mailto:lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org] On Behalf Of Doug Henwood Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2011 09:56 To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Wisconsin recall results
On Aug 11, 2011, at 10:43 AM, Wojtek S wrote:
> Does not the former explain the latter? I honestly doubt that
> any openly pro-union candidate would have a realistic chance of
> winning elections in most jurisdictions.
We don't know, do we?