Wisconsin governor recall exit polls

Wisconsin governor recall exit polls

Here's a key set of facts

46% of Wisconsinites voted to recall conservative Scott Walker.

51% of the voters said they will vote for President Obama in November. (That represents a 7-point lead because of the uncommitted and undecided voters.)

Here's how the left-wingers spin that: "Despite the fact that the election was dominated by right-wing nutburgers supported by billionaires from out-of-state, President Obama still holds a strong lead in the state and will crush Romney in this potential swing state."

Here's how the right-wingers spin that: "Even among an electorate dominated by Obama supporters, Scott Walker's sensible policies have been vindicated and unions have been rejected."

If you think through those positions, you'll see how ridiculous and self-contradictory they are. The truth is that neither side can assume either Armageddon or a new Golden Age. In fact, there may be no implications for anything outside of the election itself.

Here's what the recall election really means, in a nutshell:

The key question:

Why is this true:

18% of Obama supporters voted for Walker, whose policies are diametrically opposed to Obama's.

The answer:

That's because an overwhelming majority of the people who voted feel that recall elections are only appropriate in the case of official misconduct, or not at all. The election was decided by a small, highly principled percentage of the electorate, people who are Obama supporters and voted for Walker in the belief that the recall election itself was bullshit. (Not to mention expensive, in a state famed for people who don't like to part with a buck.)

The Wisconsin election laws are written so that the governor does not really have a four-year term. If enough people sign a petition, a recall election can be called one year after the original election. It can be called for any reason, or for no reason at all. That's what happened. With nothing having changed, the petitioners called for a do-over, with the same two guys running, just a short time after the original election.

So what happened? In 2010, Tom Barrett got 46.5% of the vote against Walker; in 2012, 46.3%.

No surprises. No global implications. They simply held the same election over again and got the exact same results. There's really no news at all. You didn't hear that on TV, did you? That's because if there's no news the cable people create some so they can fill the news cycle and pontificate in favor of their pet positions.