No, Dems were not outspent 7 to 1 in Wisconsin

posted at 7:25 pm on June 7, 2012 by Karl

Politico’s Glenn Thrush is the poster boy for hackery rationalizing Gov. Scott Walker’s victory in the WI recall election:

There’s really only one story in Wisconsin, though you wouldn’t know it from the high paragraphs of most news analyses. It’s M-O-N-E-Y.

Cash doesn’t talk in 2012, it shouts, and Wisconsin was a sonic boom that’s breaking glass in Chicago.

Conservative groups outspent unions and progs in Wisconsin by an estimated SEVEN-TO-ONE.

You’ll find less shouty, but still misleading, versions of this all over the media, e.g., Reuters, NPR, and the WaPo’s Greg Sargent (who is shockingly more accurate at the margin on this one). They are all following the lead of Obama campaign flack Jim Messina, who is trying to raise money off the claim that conservative groups “were willing to spend nearly EIGHT times as much money as the Democratic candidate and his allies raised.”

These claims, depending on the phraseology, range from misleading to flatly false, even based on the sources from which the claims are made.

The spending story stems from a release by the liberal Center for Public Integrity, which took based its analysis on data from the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign (ostensibly nonpartisan, but a past recipient of Soros money and the sort of group whose director told CPI the spending was “outrageous and wrong”). However, according to that data, when you combine the spending of the candidates and their supporting groups, the gap shrinks to 2-to-1.

Moreover, it is a fair bet those figures do not include all of the money spent by left-leaning groups on all candidates in the recall.

Indeed, it should be underscored that the left/media here is focused entirely on spending in the gubernatorial recall, when this election was just one of many the left attempted to turn into referenda on Gov. Walker’s public-sector collective bargaining reforms. If once considers the total amounts spent during the Days of Cheesehead Rage on state senate recall elections, Supreme Court elections and so on in 2011-12, the gap shrinks to roughly 1.5-to-1.

Lastly, these figures only account for sums legally required to be publicly reported (and assumes those sums are properly quantified). Rutgers University economist Leo Troy has estimated that actual union political spending is likely several times higher than generally reported. There is no reason to think otherwise in this case.

In short, it is not clear the left was outspent in its attempts to reverse Gov. Walker’s reforms. And the widely-repeated claim that the left was outspent by more than 7-to-1 in the most recent recall election is clearly false.

This post was promoted from GreenRoom to HotAir.com.
To see the comments on the original post, look here.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

so what

gerrym51 on June 7, 2012 at 7:26 PM

Good job, Karl. As Larry Elder says, “Facts to a liberal are like Kryptonite to Superman”.

peski on June 7, 2012 at 7:27 PM

What’s the dollar amount value of the media being 100% in the tank for the democrats/unions? A 2-to-1 spending margin in favor of the GOP candidate doesn’t even begin to close the gap on the free media spin democrats get in every single election. Hell, 7-to-1 just begins to make it a fair fight.

Rational Thought on June 7, 2012 at 7:29 PM

And donations supporting Walker were all VOLUNTARY.

Marcola on June 7, 2012 at 7:29 PM

Even lefties who write for semi-respectable publications have to sprinkle in WORDS in ALL-CAPS?

Doing that doesn’t make your arguments any better. Plus it’s annoying. Please stop.

forest on June 7, 2012 at 7:30 PM

Well said Marcola.

ArtVandelay on June 7, 2012 at 7:31 PM

Don’t matter…The official line in going to be ‘It’s all about THE Money’ and not the real reason…

‘Our ideology and ideas suck out loud and people are finally starting to figuring that out..’

Good job, Karl. As Larry Elder says, “Facts to a liberal are like Kryptonite to Superman”.

peski on June 7, 2012 at 7:27 PM

s/b Facts to a liberal are like water off a duck’s a$$…

BigWyo on June 7, 2012 at 7:32 PM

The bottom line of this type of argument is that the democrats are whining because information got through to the voters about what the two candidates actually stood for, would actually do in office. Democrats hate it — or should I say HATE it — when voters are informed. Nothing makes them whine louder or cry harder than when the truth gets out.

Rational Thought on June 7, 2012 at 7:33 PM

The Democrats didn’t have a problem in 2008 when Obama was outspending McCain 2-1 or more.

bw222 on June 7, 2012 at 7:34 PM

Yeah, the only numbers I had come across were from msm articles and they said that Walker spent 50 mill and the unions only 10 mill. No other numbers, donors, parties were mentioned… which leads one to take it immediately with a boulder of salt.

Logus on June 7, 2012 at 7:36 PM

But John McCain was out spent 3:1 by Barack Obama in 2008.

Mr. Joe on June 7, 2012 at 7:38 PM

Welcome To ‘My Progressive Little Ponyland’! It’s Forward! It’s The Future And I Swear It Works!

http://predicthistunpredictpast.blogspot.com/2012/06/welcome-to-my-progressive-little.html

M2RB: The Goo Goo Dolls

Resist We Much on June 7, 2012 at 7:39 PM

“If once considers the total amounts spent during the Days of Cheesehead Rage on state senate recall elections, Supreme Court elections and so on in 2011-12, the gap shrinks to roughly 1.5-to-1.”

THIS…!!!

Seven Percent Solution on June 7, 2012 at 7:41 PM

O’Reilly did a brutal take down of leslie marshall the night after. Even excepting the premise, he just kept asking ‘why’…demanding that she go beyond her talking points.

she finally collapsed and said she didn’t know why the rich leftists didn’t get into the race….which allowed Bill to say…because the country is changing before our eyes.

he may have a point. true Progs will come to resent the thuggery of the unions as their pensions/benes squeeze out the programs for the poor.

the Dems are playing a nasty game (i know, i know)…that ends with truly poor people getting the shaft royal, living in cities with no street lights and pot holes in the street…while the well off pensioners live in nice areas and take nice vacays on the taxpayer dime.

r keller on June 7, 2012 at 7:42 PM

the truth never stopped the lsm before why start now?

cmsinaz on June 7, 2012 at 7:45 PM

does this include fake sick days by “teachers” to protest

newrouter on June 7, 2012 at 7:45 PM

#doyourecall Labor spent $30 million in Ohio to block SB 5.

No crying about money then.

mad saint jack on June 7, 2012 at 7:47 PM

If Obama wouldn’t even say Wisconsin last Tuesday why would Dem donors waste money on the Recall?

Herb on June 7, 2012 at 7:49 PM

…what is it with these people? ….Everytime they open their mouth…do we have to respond with…YOU LIE?

KOOLAID2 on June 7, 2012 at 7:53 PM

What’s the dollar amount value of the media being 100% in the tank for the democrats/unions? [...]

Rational Thought on June 7, 2012 at 7:29 PM

.
Exactly! When the value of media promotion and “infomercial” coverage for liberals and DemocRATs is included the sum dwarfs the amount sped on behalf of Republicans, I’m sure.

ExpressoBold on June 7, 2012 at 7:54 PM

We have a saying here in Possum Holler.

“Ya ain’t got tha money, ya don’ts play the game.”

I can already hears tha whining from the Leftie/Commie/Democrats about how Bain Capital and Romney’s rich friends “BOUGHT” the Presidency for him.

So predictable they are.

PappyD61 on June 7, 2012 at 7:55 PM

there’s a long post by Althouse ruminating on the Barrett decision to get in. Falk was the pro-labor candidate. And Ann thinks Rahm/barry wanted Barett.

http://althouse.blogspot.com/2012/06/my-post-recall-question-what-did-rahm.html

she quotes from local lefty websites. She may be playing 2 dimensional chess with herself…but i’m not so sure. like, really, everyone knows the blue state model is no longer viable. Dims themselves are trying to deal with the unions. San Jose wants to change union pensions.

barry is maybe too smart to get on the PEU bandwagon. they are by themselves. FDR didn’t like them. Also, i’m vaguely remembering that the small school stuff with Ayers/Obama didn’t much like the rigidities of the teachers unions. After all, the New Left didn’t much care for the unions back in the 60s…and of course there were no unions for the Soviets

just sayin…the coalition between the unions and the left just may be coming apart. After all…in a dynamic world..a world governed by the dialectical imperative, maybe it is time to move on

r keller on June 7, 2012 at 8:00 PM

I find the notion that Walker outspent his opponents at all to be questionable. Although i reside in Minnesota , I’m right across the river from Cheesehead land and my cable system is headquartered there. As a result I’ve had the dubious privilege of having a ringside seat to all the political goings on. Before Barrett was selected to face Walker in the recall the Dems had a runoff election in which about a half dozen candidates participated. The campaign was longer than the final Walker Barrett campaign. The ads from all the candidates focused almost entirely on Walker, with surprisingly little internecine backbiting. There were almost no pro-Walker ads during this phase.

Once Barrett was selected the ads became nearly wall to wall 24/7. Although I had neither the interest or enthusiasm to keep an accurate tally my eyeball impression was that, uo until the last week of the campaign, Pro Barrett ads outnumbered pro Walker ads at least 2-1. BTW The Barrett ads continued to run right through election day.

Of course Walker’s efforts included an extensive GOTV scheme which would have cost a bundle, but the public rhetoric was unquestionably dominated by the anti Walker forces, although it was hampered by the fact that so much of it was provably BS, that even normally loyal leftists were criticizing it.

djaces on June 7, 2012 at 8:00 PM

I LOVE HIM.

Watch this 2 1/2 minute video and tell me it’s just as true today as it was 35 years ago.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fqCS7Y_kME

Makes me smile.

PappyD61 on June 7, 2012 at 8:00 PM

ExpressoBold on June 7, 2012 at 7:54 PM

And what is the value of all the fraudulent votes? You know, like, on a per-vote basis?

iurockhead on June 7, 2012 at 8:02 PM

Campaign money is only EVIL when the other side gets more.

Wasn’t any talk from the Democrats about EVIL money during the Obama/McCain election cycle.

GarandFan on June 7, 2012 at 8:03 PM

Conservative ideas are a good investment, Liberal ones are not. I sent money to Walker and Kleefisch.

The Market speaks.

Trying to shout it down is a fool’s game, and the Fools are in it to win it.

jamie gumm on June 7, 2012 at 8:04 PM

As if the propaganda coming from the LSM didn’t amount to about a half billion dollars worth of free political advertisement. What then? 1 to 4 say?

Tomolena1 on June 7, 2012 at 8:06 PM

To me it doesn’t matter if they were outspent 20:1. There wasn’t even supposed to BE an election on June 5th. They tried to oust the governor for purely political reasons: no public crisis, no corruption. If they got outspent too bad. THe guy shouldn’t have had to campaign twice for his 4 year term.

earlgrey133 on June 7, 2012 at 8:12 PM

Cash doesn’t talk in 2012, it shouts, and Wisconsin was a sonic boom that’s breaking glass in Chicago.

Conservative groups outspent unions and progs in Wisconsin by an estimated SEVEN-TO-ONE.

You’ll find less shouty, but still misleading, versions of this all over the media

For maximum irony, many of these sources claiming the exact same thing are acting like they’re the only ones brave and politically incorrect enough to fill us in on the real meaning of the failed Wisconsin recall.

tom on June 7, 2012 at 8:12 PM

While it’s a good thing to knock down every leftist canard they raise, I feel a little Breitbartian on this one.

“You won because you outspent us!”

“So?”

From which point one may suggest that next time they’d better raise and spend a lot more money on their futile candidates and causes, and perhaps gain a feel for what it’s like to pour taxpayer dollars down government ratholes. Or politely suggest that their President declared an end to all campaign funding restraints when he opted out of the system in 2008 and we’re just following suit.

Point is, we’re a larger voting bloc, and when we’re motivated we can out-campaign, out-fundraise, and out-vote them in all but the most benighted regions of the land.

“So?” TAWANDA. There’s a reason that scene had so much resonance.

de rigueur on June 7, 2012 at 8:14 PM

And what is the value of all the fraudulent votes? You know, like, on a per-vote basis?

iurockhead on June 7, 2012 at 8:02 PM

.
The same variable cost as always with a predictable fixed cost including an amount that is included called “indirect costs,” unidentifiable as to the exact busload or precinct involved. You know, like, bus driver hush money and stuff, over and above the union scale for triple overtime.

ExpressoBold on June 7, 2012 at 8:18 PM

Note to the “They out spent us” crowd…

When you start a fight and get your shredded butt tossed out the door, whining that the other guy had an unfair advantage ain’t gonna help the fact that you got pummeled in a fight that you started.

The women ain’t gonna be impressed either.

WestTexasBirdDog on June 7, 2012 at 8:19 PM

“So?”

de rigueur on June 7, 2012 at 8:14 PM

Exactly! You would think that we had held a gun to their heads and made them throw tens of millions of dollars down the drain by primarying Blanche Lincoln in an obvious Republican-wave election year and instigating two separate recalls in Wisconsin, including backing the never-was-gonna-get-out-of-the-Democratic-primary-candidate, Falk.

Crybabies!

Resist We Much on June 7, 2012 at 8:25 PM

I don’t get it. Other than the foolish independents who can be swayed by anything from the tone of voice, haircut, or color of tie the candidates wear, or the clueless, ignorant people who vote on candidates they know nothing about, beyond the number of signs they see with a name, or commercials they hear, What difference does it make how much is spent?

Does anyone think that Uppereastslide , Libfreeordye, or Lesster are going to vote for Rmoney if he spends even a trillion? or conversely, is anyone sane going to vote for 0bama just because he will outspend Romney by 5 times, (despite having 90% of the media pimping for him at no charge.) ?

LegendHasIt on June 7, 2012 at 8:25 PM

But John McCain was out spent 3:1 by Barack Obama in 2008.

“Yeah but that’s okay because…shut up.” —-> Liberal retort.

What difference does it make how much is spent?

For me, the implication has always been that the votes are bought…that somehow that money makes its way into the pockets of the electorate in order to get votes. Which is funny because if that’s true, there are lots of conservative campaigns that owe me quite a bit.

I also think it’s projection. See my above comment. So much in liberal politics is projection.

englishqueen01 on June 7, 2012 at 8:53 PM

The Dems are lying about deliberately misrepresenting how much each side spent.

But regardless of who spent what, after 18 months of non-stop wall-to-wall local and national news coverage of what happened in Wisconsin is there much doubt that everyone living in Wisconsin — other than the stupidest, laziest, or most apathetic — knew exactly what Scott Walker did, what the issues were, what was at stake, and where Walker and his opposition stood? It was, after all, a frakin RECALL election.

The Dems are blowing smoke and attempting to con people who do not live in Wisconsin about what actually happened in Wisconsin.

farsighted on June 7, 2012 at 9:16 PM

Very unsuprising, but welcome, article. Watching the pathetic excuses from MSM/left when the election outcome was clear, the 1 to 7 spending in Walkers favour didn’t pass the smell test. I was just waiting for someone to look into it.

NORUK on June 7, 2012 at 9:27 PM

The money they really care about is the union dues they aren’t going to get because Scott Walker freed the slaves the unions held captive.

So that must seem huge to them. I think only a third stayed in the union.

petunia on June 7, 2012 at 9:41 PM

“So?” is always one of my favorite questions.

However, the answer in this instance is: “So the Left can’t make excuses for why they lost. Walker’s reforms worked and most people like them. That’s why they lost.”

Karl on June 7, 2012 at 9:49 PM

The left and the MSM live in a fantasy world where the truth is what they say it is. The rest of us live in the real world where the truth is always the truth and lies are always lies. Here is one truth the MSM didn’t put out, the polls were kept open in the heavy Democrat areas of Milwaukee until 9:30 PM while throughout the state the polls closed at 8:00 pm. It still didn’t help them. Lying and cheating is the forte of the left.

savage24 on June 7, 2012 at 9:54 PM

I live in Hawaii and sent Walker $50. The unions, I understand, spent considerably more. There the astro-turf apparatus, not Walker.

StubbleSpark on June 7, 2012 at 10:09 PM

Unions spent something like $21 million during their fiasco (hey, union members, sucks to be you when you need something and there’s no money,eh?)

Outside interests spent like another $24 million. There was nothing left for Barrett. The Dems shot their wad.

Funny thing is, Dems are constantly complaining about “outside money.”

William Teach on June 7, 2012 at 10:09 PM

Unions spent something like $21 million during their fiasco (hey, union members, sucks to be you when you need something and there’s no money,eh?)

Outside interests spent like another $24 million. There was nothing left for Barrett. The Dems shot their wad.

Funny thing is, Dems are constantly complaining about “outside money.”

William Teach on June 7, 2012 at 10:09 PM

That’s only the real money the unions spent, their members donated or were ‘strongly urged’ to donate all kinds of free labor to the entire recall movement(s). Perversely, in some cases employers even got stuck with that cost because their employees were on ‘union bidness’. You got a problem widdat?

slickwillie2001 on June 7, 2012 at 10:40 PM

Rand Paul’s Romney Endorsement Fallout: Crazy Like Alex Jones

http://predicthistunpredictpast.blogspot.com/2012/06/rands-romney-endorsement-fallout-crazy.html

M2RB: Robert Ownby

Resist We Much on June 7, 2012 at 11:12 PM

Bill O’Reilly has not countered the “7:1″ spin, either.

A night or two ago, Bill O had two Democratic Party spokeswomen/advisors on to talk about the Wisconsin recall. One of the liberal flacks cited the “Walker outspent Barrett seven to one” meme, and rather than counter it, Bill went in to Full Bluster Mode, shouting “Why did Walker get so much more money?”.

A better debater would have blasted Bill O, but the shell-shocked liberal let O’Reilly off the hook. None the less, Bill O accepted the “7:1″ meme, and granted it validity by not challenging it.

The proper answer was of course that Walker DID NOT outspend the opposition seven to one, but I guess yelling and blustering is easier than doing some basic homework.

MidniteRambler on June 7, 2012 at 11:13 PM

To me it doesn’t matter if they were outspent 20:1. There wasn’t even supposed to BE an election on June 5th. They tried to oust the governor for purely political reasons: no public crisis, no corruption. If they got outspent too bad. The guy shouldn’t have had to campaign twice for his 4 year term.

earlgrey133 on June 7, 2012 at 8:12 PM

This is it exactly.

PatriotGal2257 on June 7, 2012 at 11:20 PM

WHY can’t anyone TELL THE TRUTH around here?

The Liberals, The Democrats and The Unions spent $20 Million on the “Recall Effort”

Walker spent just under $4 Million

That’s a Ratio of Walker being OUTSPENT by over 5-to-1!!

Mark Levin documented this in his show LAST NIGHT!

williamg on June 7, 2012 at 11:20 PM

And if we outspend them 7-1 the rest of the cycle… money well spent. Bury these freaking cockroaches.

/pacino

JohnGalt23 on June 7, 2012 at 11:45 PM

While the old axiom goes ‘people vote wit their feet ‘ in this case they voted with their wallet. I recall (teehee) that move on.org was Pleading poverty in the run-up to June 6.

This is the most fun I’ve had since Nov 2010.

socalcon on June 8, 2012 at 3:13 AM

7 to 1

Um, er, lefties are not good with math. For your consideration:

57 states

With the Stimulus Bill, unemployment will not exceed 8% ( but hey, I get the signs screwed up all the time)

Three letter word J O B S.

{I know there are more, but I’m getting sleepy}

socalcon on June 8, 2012 at 3:27 AM

I knew this line was baloney the first time it was uttered – union in-kind expenditures aren’t reported at all, and they were bragging about spending $21 million on the recalls.

WaPo has become a mere shill for the far left, which may be why they are bleeding subscribers and advertisers and revenue and losing money hand over first. At the rate they are going, someone will buy them for $1 in a couple of years, and make it back by selling the office furniture.

Anything used by Greg Sargent will have to be burned, of course, in the interest of public health.

Adjoran on June 8, 2012 at 3:34 AM

With WI the PEUs have found a fun and new way to bankrupt themselves: resist reform and stage recall elections.

Every Blue State Governor should take heed and do the very first thing necessary to get Union reforms in place: stop the government from being the Union dues collector.

That simple first step makes every other reform possible that you can imagine because it kills off the money flow into the Unions.

Even if dues collected were just $5/mo, in WI AFSCME lost 50k voters for a drop in income of $250k/mo. Or, $3M/yr. And if the Union has glommed on to any MORE per month, then the pain gets worse, much worse, per month and per year. Kill the cash flow and, suddenly, pension reform, health care reform, and actually reducing the size of government by putting in a ‘get rid of the underperformers at the bottom 10% of the workforce’ becomes possible by pulling shields based on seniority in the workforce. When you volunteer to work for the public, the public sets the work rules and you know the public can change them: this is not a for profit organization seeking to steal your pay, but the public seeking efficient government.

Yes you can attack the problem ‘directly’ and more often than not win, but if you are a weak-kneed Governor then the #1 mildest form of reform is now open, viable, and relatively easy to do in a Blue State. Do a bit of freeing up for local and municipal governments and soon, very soon, Mayors and County Executives start to do the necessary low level work.

Scott Walker’s reforms went beyond that, yes, but the very mildest of reforms started to yield results and balanced budgets in a year at the local levels and the State level due to larger reforms. Of course this makes you a reformer in a Blue State and you will soon become a target of vilification by the Unions and the extreme Left. And yet such reforms will be popular… and these enemies will lose against you if they try to run on repealing the reforms and if they muddle the message they lose. They lose big time. You may need to adjust your politics a bit after your once erstwhile friends have turned on you… you know, cut the goody train off to them and be a bit less weak-kneed about things.

ajacksonian on June 8, 2012 at 7:54 AM

If once considers the total amounts spent during the Days of Cheesehead Rage…

The preferred term, as we agreed at MM’s site, is “Daze of Whine and Cheese”.

Dexter_Alarius on June 8, 2012 at 8:17 AM

If we as voters are solely swayed to vote one way or another by an advertisement we are more screwed than initially thought. I just don’t get polls – do people really change their vote more than they change their underwear?

Alibali on June 8, 2012 at 8:32 AM

Center for Charade of Public Integrity

shick on June 8, 2012 at 9:15 AM

Via Radio Equalizer:

Issuing a call to arms, an angry Reverend Execrable Al Sharpton today claimed Republicans utilized fraudulent tactics to win yesterday’s gubernatorial recall vote in Wisconsin.

Claiming the results “emboldened the right-wing”, the MSNBC host told radio listeners it was a mere trial run for widespread vote theft designed to steal November’s presidential election outright.

Comparing their loss to a boxing match, Sharpton told supporters they could either remain “groggy” after a hit on the head or “double-down and get ready to fight.”

Akzed on June 8, 2012 at 9:23 AM

So Al’s laying the ground work for race riots, it seems.

Akzed on June 8, 2012 at 9:23 AM

I truly hope the Dems actually believe this tripe, because it will only help secure their demise. We should simply agree with them and let them think their message is superior and they will win if they can only get enough money. That strategy is bankrupt in its thinking and will result it in being the same financially.

I just nod and say ‘you might be right’ – smile wryly and move along hoping they continue this ‘Stuxnet’ strategy.

NeoDawg on June 8, 2012 at 10:03 AM

Yep, Spin.
From all sides….whirling dervishes.

I recall all the Repub whining about ‘Bam’s Billions’ – but now it’s giddy ‘Romney raised 60mil!!’.
Regardless, no more worries about candidates being ‘off message’ as long as they are ‘on money’.

Great piece below on how we all got here…
Might be too long a read for the blog-spin post/snarky tweet set –

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/05/21/120521fa_fact_toobin?currentPage=all

verbaluce on June 8, 2012 at 10:31 AM

WHY can’t anyone TELL THE TRUTH around here?

The Liberals, The Democrats and The Unions spent $20 Million on the “Recall Effort”

Walker spent just under $4 Million

That’s a Ratio of Walker being OUTSPENT by over 5-to-1!!

Mark Levin documented this in his show LAST NIGHT!

williamg on June 7, 2012 at 11:20 PM

No big surprise Levin can spin as well.
I’m sure one could say Walker (personally) spent about $50 bucks. (For the beer, I think.)

verbaluce on June 8, 2012 at 10:39 AM

Common Cause, Center for Public Integrity, et al

These people have no sense of irony – or shame. They certainly haven’t read Orwell.

jangle12 on June 8, 2012 at 11:10 AM

It’s what the left does: lie repeatedly and often in hopes we’re all so stupid that we’ll buy it.

Christian Conservative on June 8, 2012 at 11:18 AM

And don’t forget the uncivilized union thugs tore up the beautiful capitol, which cost millions to repair. I am sick of those people.

Fleuries on June 8, 2012 at 11:21 AM

“If once considers the total amounts spent during the Days of Cheesehead Rage on state senate recall elections, Supreme Court elections and so on in 2011-12, the gap shrinks to roughly 1.5-to-1.”

And, of course don’t forget the money the unions poured into LaFollette’s gubernatorial campaign of ’48

plewis on June 8, 2012 at 1:20 PM

If the Left is saying Walker won because he spent more, then what they’re REALLY Saying is, ideas don’t matter.

MAC1000 on June 8, 2012 at 1:54 PM

Democrats lied on Wisconsin spending? Shocka.

dthorny on June 8, 2012 at 2:03 PM

Even if you could put a dollar value on the union foot-soldiers efforts in this contest you would have to add in to Walkers total the Tea Party volunteer’s efforts. It, however, is irrelevant because there are two ways you can vote, with the ballot or with dollars. Either way the Donkeys lost.

bindare on June 9, 2012 at 5:56 PM