Some In Wisconsin Are Concerned, But Not Enough That We’d Quote Them

Amid concerns by some that the winner may have problems with a fractured base, the candidates have made an effort to attack Mr. Walker more than one another in the final days before the primary.

“People have been really trying to make sure we keep it clean and positive so that no matter who emerges there are no hard feelings, there are no burnt emotions,” said Phillip Walzak, a spokesman for Mr. Barrett’s campaign.

Then who’s concerned here? I mean, if “some” are concerned, and if we are “amid” those concerns, it might be nice to at least know who is so terribly troubled by the natural political process of choosing a candidate.

(How else were they supposed to do this, btw? Put a bunch of names in a hat and let David Brooks set the hat on fire?)

I mean, if you have five voters who all say, “You know, I’m worried about unity following the primaries,” okay, but what you have here is a campaign spokesman who thinks everybody is going to be just fine because they’ve been working really hard. That’s the opposite of what your lead-in graf is asserting.

Many Democrats in Wisconsin expect the anti-Walker effort to quickly close ranks around its nominee as soon as votes are tallied on Tuesday night. But recent polls and fund-raising totals also suggest that the party has little room for distractions in its quest to unseat the well-financed governor.

Well, if the Democrats do close ranks quickly, then there will be no distractions, so what is the problem here again?

Look, it’s not that I don’t believe this whole thing has been difficult, but as usual our crack national political reporters are on the case of vicarious trolling and making not-quite-predictions, muttering darkly about “distractions” and “concerns” that they then don’t specify or attribute. The story’s like please-don’t-piss-anybody-off bingo, noting potential pitfalls and then discounting them in the next graf:

Since the start of 2011, Mr. Walker has raised more than $25 million. Campaign finance reports released by candidates last week showed that Mr. Walker raised more than $13 million over the past three months alone, dwarfing Mr. Barrett’s $831,000 and Ms. Falk’s $977,000.

That advantage, however, was less apparent in a poll conducted last month by Marquette University Law School that showed Mr. Walker and Mr. Barrett essentially tied in a general election matchup. Mr. Walker led Ms. Falk 49 percent to 43 percent among likely voters, a six-point advantage that is within the poll’s margin of sampling error of plus or minus 4 percentage points on each candidate.

So the governor’s well-financed campaign is dangerous to the Dems, except that a major poll says it’s not. There are about a million ways to cover the primary today (as is evidenced, I intend to mostly retweet smarter people than me and poke at the stupid coverage) so why choose the least effective one?

For decent coverage from the locals check outDane 101’s results reporting tonight from 8-10 p.m.


3 thoughts on “Some In Wisconsin Are Concerned, But Not Enough That We’d Quote Them

  1. MapleStreet says:

    1) This talking about the dems after seeing the repubs and talk show pundits tear each other limb from limb for the presidential nomination just for the joy of causing pain? I can easily imagine it wasn’t easy to get a dem to give an interview that was anything but puppy dogs and butterflies. But that being said, I agree that the job of the reporter is to keep asking and find the information.
    2) The NYT piece and its high information density kind of reminds me of South Park when Cartman gave the morning announcements along the lines of if Wendy hates smurfs it would hold to reason that she is diverting playground funds for building an anti-smurf bomb. Now I’m not saying that she does or she doesn’t. I’m just asking questions…
    Quite a shame that the NYT has sunk to the level of a parody of less than reputable news agencies.

  2. Thanks for the dane101 shoutout! Also, my (completely anecdotal) experience at the Vinehout and La Follette parties tonight was that supporters of both are definitely going to vote Barrett because, duh, they want to recall Walker. However, the volunteers, at least *some* of them, are not as interested in diverting their time and energy to his campaign.
    Either way, NYT is doing a horrible job of jumping on the Wisconsin recall coverage bandwagon. This piece problem came out of an editorial meeting that went something like, “We should write something about Wisconsin. WaPo’s totally kicking our ass there.”

  3. My favorite new Twitter account to follow is “NYT is ON IT!” It’s hilarious. (@NYTonIt) The latest entry: ‏
    GUYS, just FYI: still sounds like asteroids killed the dinosaurs, and The Times is ON IT.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: