Highest Turnout Ain’t Good Enough

While the state dislocates an elbow patting itself on the back for reaching 49% of eligible voters casting a ballot in the elections on April 5th…keep in mind that 51%…the majority…didn’t show up. So once again…a minority…no matter how sizable…made some pretty important decisions!


Related Articles

16 thoughts on “Highest Turnout Ain’t Good Enough

  1. The adage that “progressives win when turnout is high”, was proven false on Tuesday. How can Democrats take back this state? I’m not really sure at this point.

  2. Turnout is a big deal and when looking at the salon article and many of the other smear articles on younger Bernie Sanders supporters is that what they fail to mention is that had Hillary Clinton turnout been able to even come close to matching Bernie Sanders turnout Kloppenburg would have won.

    1. I suspect the Kloppenburg/Bradley contest was important enough in the political landscape to warrant a dose of Diebold. Other contests around the state, not so much. Once again, like Walker’s “win” in 2014, we have an upset that doesn’t match the general left/right trend of the voters who showed up at the polls. And once again the compliant media are silent on any exit poll information. Interestingly, and possibly to the point, in a Circuit Court contest here in Eau Claire County, the incumbent – a Walker appointee – was soundly routed by the grass roots candidate.

      1. Charles idk where you are getting your info from but cheating did not cost Kloppenburg this election. The Republicans once again had near Presidential turnout in a non Presidential election and the Democrats did not and turned about 100,000 less voters than the republicans again. My guess the Democrats used the same strategy of going after a smaller electorate to turn out than a presidential general election electorate.

        1. No hard information. Just speculation, based on a persistent and recurring pattern of important races going counter to the general ideological trends of recent elections – especially here in Wisconsin. This is no exception. Far from it, it’s another glaring example. While cheating may have or have not cost Kloppenburg the election, it damned likely was a contributing factor.

          1. You mean like the Tammy Baldwin election and the last two presidential elections?

            Sometimes the other person gets more votes.

            1. I mean like the cheaters choose their battles, with maintaining the Walker Regime as a high priority. I think I already went through this a few months back with you or someone like you.

              As for the last Presidential election, Google: “Anonymous, Karl Rove.”

              1. Oh so if Republicans win, it is because they cheated. And if they lose, it is because they just didn’t feel like cheating?

                What an incredibly convenient theory. I guess the GOP just wasn’t interested in getting a veto proof majority in the Senate. Or controlling the executive branch. Why would they want that?

  3. Justice Rebecca Bradley’s an admitted felon.

    “Bradley, now a state Supreme Court justice and candidate for a full term, responded in a January 2005 affidavit that she could remain on the case.
    “At one time I had a romantic relationship with (Bednall), which we both believed might result in marriage. We broke off that relationship in November 2002, although we have continued to date on a nonexclusive basis since that time,” wrote Bradley, who was divorced in 2004.”


    Adultery’s a felony under Wisconsin law.

    From Justice R. Bradley’s website about her, “judicial philosophy.”

    “The people of Wisconsin are best served by justices who understand and embrace their duty to state what the law is, not what they prefer it to be.”


    Why couldn’t media get out Jim and Tammy-Faye Baker style hypocrisy?

    Jessica Hahn


    Has there even been an admitted felon on the Wisconsin Supreme Court? What about any state Supreme Court?

    1. I agree totally. It’s every bit as absurd as, if not more so than, the presence of a known (if not admitted) felon in the Governor’s office. Bradley now joins the ranks of a body, part of whose now-implicit mission is to protect the likes of Walker and herself from having to face charges for their criminal activity.

  4. I’m really tired of all the unfounded “cheating” accusations. I can’t stand Walker and most of the GOP in Wisconsin right now, but there is absolutely no evidence that they are rigging voting machines or “stealing” elections. It just comes off like whiny loser talk when you start throwing around serious allegations of election fraud without any shred of evidence.

    Maybe we just need to admit that more people liked Bradley and her views than they cared for Kloppenburg and hers. The truth is tough, but it’s easier to fix the situation going forward if we’re at least honest with ourselves.

    1. Unfortunately it does come off like “whiny loser talk.” That is one of the more frustrating things about trying to expose the cheating that is in fact taking place with almost every ideologically critical election. Many of us can clearly see what is going on, but whenever we have the audacity to point it out, we get scathed from both sides of the aisle for being “tinfoil hat” types. Again, Google: “Walker, law of large numbers.” The evidence is irrefutable – it is mathematically impossible for Walker to have won his 2014 election. And there is no reason to think he won either of the two previous ones, or that Bradley won her race. Indeed, there are numerous reasons to make all of those contests suspect.

        1. Charles suggested Googling a couple of items which will irrefutably prove his allegations. You did nothing to address the issue; rather, you went into personal attack mode. So who’s stupid? How about we let the forum at large weigh in?

        2. Charles did prove his allegation.

          David, as always, “offers plenty of evidence of stupidity.”

Comments are closed.