Why the left’s showing in Wisconsin Supreme Court race is a big deal (WAPO)

[htuttle]

Why the left’s showing in Wisconsin Supreme Court race is a big deal
By Greg Sargent
In the nationally-watched Wisconsin state Supreme Court race, liberal challenger JoAnne Kloppenburg has edged ahead of conservative sitting justice David Prosser by just over 200 votes.

We still don’t know who is going to win, and we may not know for some time to come. But even if Kloppenburg loses, labor strategists argue, this will have constituted a victory for unions and Dems — proof of Scott Walker’s continuing toxicity, and of the staying power of the grassroots energy he unleashed. They’re right.

(snip)

First, the current results reflect a massive and astonishingly fast swing of support away from Prosser and in Kloppenburg’s favor. In a primary election in February (Wisconsin judicial elections are nonpartisan, and the top two primary victors face off in the general), Prosser beat Koppenburg by 30 points, 55-25. The current results show she doubled her vote share in just over six weeks, while Prosser has lost ground. This huge shift happened for one reason: Scott Walker.

Second, it’s extremely rare in Wisconsin to oust sitting Supreme Court justices. In 2008, Louis Butler was unseated, but as University of Wisconsin professor Charles Franklin points out to me, he had originally been appointed and not elected. The last time this happened before that was 44 years ago, and it only happened three times before that since the court was created in 1852.

(more at link)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/why-the-lefts-showing-in-wisconsin-supreme-court-race-is-a-big-deal/2011/03/03/AF9GUvpC_blog.html

I stayed up so late waiting for returns, that I'm too tired right now to say anything but this:

.
.
.

"w00t!"

[Webster Green]

1. Unrec for bullshit article.

That article is framed to make it seem that the election isn't over. It's over and she won. If there is a recount, that's a different deal altogether.

DUer AmBlue just pointed that out very nicely here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=829622&mesg_id=829622

SHE WON!!

[Bumblebee]

3. We all want her to win but this is ridiculous. Just this afternoon, with all

precincts already in, her lead went from 336 to 204 when AP was adjusting tallies. When you deal with small numbers like that, you can never be sure until all tallies are final and official and there are no further adjustments. Plus you have to be particularly in denial not to see the recount coming and know that small leads like that are fragile. He is right, you are wrong -- and I happen to think that she will indeed prevail in the end.

[Webster Green]

4. Wrong!

You obviously didn't read the post I linked to.

The rethugs and their subservient media whores should not be allowed to frame this their way.

She got more votes, therefore, she won!

[druidity33]

5. Wisconsin State Law dictates

that if the margin of victory is within .5% of the vote, the recount is mandatory.

:shrug:

[Ellipsis]

6. No it's a free recount but not mandatory.

Free as in no expense to the petitioner.

[Webster Green]

7. Good. I'm fine with a recount since it was so close.

However, she has won the election. Mmm-kay? We cannot let the rethug controlled media give the impression that the election ended in a draw. She fucking won!

The article linked to below is more honest framing of the situation. (IMO)

http://www.alternet.org/newsandviews/article/551172/update%3A_kloppenburg_wins_wi_supreme_court_election

[lunatica]

2. to quote Biden, "Its a big fucking deal!"