WI Gov. Scott Walker implicated in criminal probe

mikedenk said:
They don't in all cases. In this case, signing the petition indicates direct opposition of a candidate/party, which is the equivalent of supporting a candidate/party.
Click to expand...

Really?

I'm against Roy Moore, the Republican nominee for Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama.

Now tell me, using the information above, which candidate for the office I support.
 
Last edited:
mikedenk said:
In this case, signing the petition indicates direct opposition of a candidate/party, which is the equivalent of supporting a candidate/party.
Click to expand...

Holy fallacy of the excluded middle, Batman!
 
ANTPogo said:
Really?

I'm against Roy Moore, the Republican nominee for Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama.

Now tell me, using the information above, which candidate for the office I support.
Click to expand...


The judges are not just "against" a candidate. They are actively and directly supporting the recall of a politician. In this particular recall election there are two outcomes: Republican or Democrat... one is not supporting the Common Sense party by signing the recall election. If you are supporting the recall of the Republican, you are supporting the election of the Democrat.
 
mikedenk said:
The judges are not just "against" a candidate. They are actively and directly supporting the recall of a politician. In this particular recall election there are two outcomes: Republican or Democrat... one is not supporting the Common Sense party by signing the recall election. If you are supporting the recall of the Republican, you are supporting the election of the Democrat.
Click to expand...

Okay, then. I am for the recall of Gov. Walker.

Name the candidate I support for governor of Wisconsin.
 
mikedenk said:
The judges are not just "against" a candidate. They are actively and directly supporting the recall of a politician. In this particular recall election there are two outcomes: Republican or Democrat... one is not supporting the Common Sense party by signing the recall election. If you are supporting the recall of the Republican, you are supporting the election of the Democrat.
Click to expand...
Overly simplistic. It's arguable. It's also arguable they are against what they feel is inappropriate behavior by the governor and simply want someone else in office. I voted for Obama and I support Obama. If he acted in a way that I thought was improper and my only opportunity to do something about it was vote for Mitt Romney then I would do that.
 
ANTPogo said:
Okay, then. I am for the recall of Gov. Walker.

Name the candidate I support for governor of Wisconsin.
Click to expand...


In the post of mine which you originally quoted, I stated "candidate/party", which came from this line in the article linked by Ben Burch: the Wisconsin Code of Judicial Conduct, which prohibits judges from supporting political parties or candidates... You have reduced that to just "candidate".

I'll assume this must be an attempt to make me wait until May 8th (Wisconsin Dem primary) before I can respond! :)
 
mikedenk said:
In the post of mine which you originally quoted, I stated "candidate/party", which came from this line in the article linked by Ben Burch: the Wisconsin Code of Judicial Conduct, which prohibits judges from supporting political parties or candidates... You have reduced that to just "candidate".

I'll assume this must be an attempt to make me wait until May 8th (Wisconsin Dem primary) before I can respond! :)
Click to expand...

All right, then. Under Wisconsin state law, while a recalled incumbent is automatically on the ballot for the recall election unless he/she resigns within 10 days of the recall election being announced, any candidate with any party affiliation can also run in the election itself, with primaries being held to determine the final candidate should there be more than one per party.

I support the recall petition. Now...am I a Democrat who wants to see a Democratic candidate elected? Or am I a Republican who wants another Republican to run, one that doesn't have the political, press, and potentially criminal baggage that Walker himself does?

Which am I, mikedenk?
 
Last edited:
ANTPogo said:
I support the recall petition. Now...am I a Democrat who wants to see a Democratic candidate elected? Or am I a Republican who wants another Republican to run, one that doesn't have the political, press, and potentially criminal baggage that Walker himself does?

Which am I, mikedenk?
Click to expand...
Does wanting someone else translate to supporting a candidate or party?
 
RandFan said:
Does wanting someone else translate to supporting a candidate or party?
Click to expand...

Even if it does, because you have no way of telling whether someone who is for the recall is doing it because they support the Republicans, the Democrats, a particular party, or even just want anyone but Walker, the statement "If you are supporting the recall of the Republican, you are supporting the election of the Democrat," is false.
 
ANTPogo said:
Even if it does, because you have no way of telling whether someone who is for the recall is doing it because they support the Republicans, the Democrats, a particular party, or even just want anyone but Walker, the statement "If you are supporting the recall of the Republican, you are supporting the election of the Democrat," is false.
Click to expand...
I agree but I think the question fails on multiple levels.
 
ANTPogo said:
All right, then. Under Wisconsin state law, while a recalled incumbent is automatically on the ballot for the recall election unless he/she resigns within 10 days of the recall election being announced, any candidate with any party affiliation can also run in the election itself, with primaries being held to determine the final candidate should there be more than one per party.

I support the recall petition. Now...am I a Democrat who wants to see a Democratic candidate elected? Or am I a Republican who wants another Republican to run, one that doesn't have the political, press, and potentially criminal baggage that Walker himself does?
Click to expand...


The political party of the judges (were they permitted to register) is irrelevant. It is their opposition/endorsement of a party, and subsequent questions regarding their neutrality, which is the issue.

As far as your question, you have managed to find an even more remote possibility than the triumph of the Common Sense Party, since there has never been, is not, nor will there be any challenge to Walker from the Republican side. Whether one is Republican, Democrat, Independent, or New Whig (again, judges are all non-affiliated), it is known that the successful recall of the Republican will lead to the successful election of the Democrat.

ANTPogo said:
Which am I, mikedenk?
Click to expand...


My bet is on New Whig.
 
mikedenk said:
It is their opposition/endorsement of a party, and subsequent questions regarding their neutrality, which is the issue.
Click to expand...
Demonstrably false. One can be against an individual without being for or against a party. Sticking your fingers in your ears and pretending you didn't see the argument is poor form.
 
RandFan said:
Overly simplistic. It's arguable. It's also arguable they are against what they feel is inappropriate behavior by the governor and simply want someone else in office. I voted for Obama and I support Obama. If he acted in a way that I thought was improper and my only opportunity to do something about it was vote for Mitt Romney then I would do that.
Click to expand...


I can see the argument that judges should be as free to sign a recall petition as they are to cast a private ballot. If I were a betting man, I would bet that the eventual ruling(?) would reflect this. Personally I think it needs to be discouraged, particularly for judges who may have to make a ruling related to the recall itself. From what I've read, this all started when a judge made a ruling on the petitions which he himself had signed. To me, that is improper.
 
RandFan said:
Demonstrably false. One can be against an individual without being for or against a party. Sticking your fingers in your ears and pretending you didn't see the argument is poor form.
Click to expand...


Being "for" or "against" an individual or party is irrelevant. Demonstrating support is what matters.

"...the Wisconsin Code of Judicial Conduct, which prohibits judges from supporting political parties or candidates..."

4 rational reasons to sign the petition:
1) Oppose Walker
2) Oppose Republican Party
3) Support Democrat Party
4) Support TBD Democrat nominee

In all 4 cases (or combination), you have supported the Democrat Party and/or TBD nominee since that party/nominee is the only alternative to Walker.
 
mikedenk said:
The political party of the judges (were they permitted to register) is irrelevant. It is their opposition/endorsement of a party, and subsequent questions regarding their neutrality, which is the issue.
Click to expand...

Your conflation of "opposition" with "endorsement" is begging the question. And the only questions of "neutrality" are in the minds of desperate Walker supporters.

As far as your question, you have managed to find an even more remote possibility than the triumph of the Common Sense Party, since there has never been, is not, nor will there be any challenge to Walker from the Republican side.
Click to expand...

Answer my question. How can you determine that someone who signed the recall is intending to support the Democratic nominee, and not intending to support a Republican challenger? How will you prove that in a court of law?

"Well, they're supporting what I think is a lost cause, therefore they're really in the tank for the other side and should be prosecuted for supporting that side!" isn't going to cut it, I bet.

Whether one is Republican, Democrat, Independent, or New Whig (again, judges are all non-affiliated), it is known that the successful recall of the Republican will lead to the successful election of the Democrat.
Click to expand...

And it is known that the successful nomination of Santorum will lead to the successful election of Obama.

That doesn't make anyone who supports Santorum a secret Democrat-supporter. Especially not that matters when it comes to the courts.
 
mikedenk said:
1) Oppose Walker

In all 4 cases (or combination), you have supported the Democrat Party and/or TBD nominee since that party/nominee is the only alternative to Walker.
Click to expand...
That's just nonsense. And I've demonstrated that. I'm against the GOP, I support Obama. If Obama screwed up I could vote him out of office without supporting the GOP.

Look, you can keep asserting that it is not the case but it won't make it true.
 
BenBurch said:
I think it is disgusting how all of these people are rushing to the defense of the criminalization of political speech. As an American I am ashamed that these people are my countrymen.
Click to expand...


False indignation is most unbecoming.

If you are against any restrictions on political speech, that's fine and I can rspect that point of view. I expect that in no time you'll be over in the thread concerning the marine's anti-obama facebook page slamming those participants and crying "shame, shame!" You would also be against every code regulating judicial conduct/ethics in the country. Myself, I feel that people in certain positions should be compelled to avoid overt political support.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom