LET'S RECAP (PLUS SOME BONUS QUESTIONS)
MacIver's Brian Fraley offers this handy summary of the Year So far:
Governor proposes bill you don't want to vote on--> Flee the State
Listener offers some good questions the media might have asked:
“Why did you consider an unofficial media report you were up by 204 reliable enough to declare victory, but you do not consider the official canvass that you are down 7,316 reliable enough to acknowledge defeat?”
“As a litigator who makes decisions based on ‘facts,’ how did you conclude you were the winner based on hearsay media reports, but now deny that Justice Prosser is the winner based on the official canvass?”
And from the Club for Growth newsletter:
Moments ago, failed state Supreme Court candidate Joanne Kloppenburg requested a recount of her 7,316 vote loss to incumbent Justice David Prosser. Or maybe we should say Kloppenburg relayed the decision made by the AFL-CIO. Apparently the unions are so politically tone-deaf they’ll insist their wholly-owned candidate stick Wisconsin taxpayers with the million-dollar expense of a pointless recount.
The recount will force the rest of us to pay for weeks of non-stories about a dozen votes changing hands here and there. Of course there will be some satisfaction in remembering how Kloppenburg jumped in front of the cameras the day after the election, reassuring everyone how confident she was that her unofficial 204-vote margin would hold. If 204 was a safe margin, how can Kloppenburg justify a recount with a margin of 7,316?
Be grateful that we’ll never know what Kloppenburg’s reaction would have been if the shoe were on the other foot; if Prosser were behind by more than 7,300 votes and asking taxpayers to foot the bill for a recount. It seems a safe bet that words like “desperate” and “wasteful” and “pathetic” would be liberally employed.