I don't think he will, but Mark Neumann does deserve to win today's Republican primary for governor of Wisconsin. Several reasons:
*Neumann is the only candidate to release plans--fairly detailed--specifying what he would do if elected governor. The Scott Walker campaign, which is based largely on bumper sticker slogans and silly soundbites, responded not with detailed plans of their own but by calling Neumann an "egomaniac." I disagree with probably 80 percent of Neumann's 210 page position manual, but applaud the candidate for taking some stands. We need more of those kinds of "egomaniacs" in contemporary politics.
*Neumann's campaign, unintentionally I think, has exposed how out of touch the Republican Party hierarchy is with the average voter on the street. The effort on the part of the party insiders to ensure that they get a nominee (i.e. Scott Walker) who represents no threat to Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce or other pet establishment insider groups has been nothing short of sickening. (Which is not to say that Neumann IS a threat to those groups; of course he is not. But at least in the campaign he has shown some ability to be independent.).
*Scott Walker's advertising might be the worst in the history of Wisconsin politics. Virtually everything is a gimmick (e.g. the "brown bag movement" nonsense), low level pandering (e.g. he'll appoint someone to guarantee more deer for hunters), or the most vile kind of "gotcha'" politics (e.g. Neumann's vote for a 1998 transportation bill while in Congress).
*Walker's performance as Milwaukee County Executive is a case study in the perils of governing with your eye aimed at someday running for higher office. Any person looking honestly at Walker's record as County Executive has to conclude that, in order to be able to posture as a fiscal tough guy, he has forced the County Board of Supervisors to do virtually all of the heavy lifting. Early in the campaign Neumann went after Walker on this point, but then backed down for reasons that are not very clear (I suspect he might want to run for another office someday and does not want to completely alienate the hacks in the party establishment.).
Recently the Walker campaign has trotted out the theory that Democrats will cross party lines to vote for Neumann because they think he (Neumann) will be a weaker candidate against Tom Barrett. If there is such a Democratic conspiracy in place, it's an extraordinarily stupid one. Scott Walker is the weakest Republican candidate since Scott McCallum (McCallum, you might recall, spent most of his campaign trashing state workers and the shared revenue program.).
Neumann v. Barrett would represent the best chance for an issue based fall campaign instead of the bumper sticker nightmare we'll get with Walker in the ring. I hope I'm wrong, but I think we're headed for the latter.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I agree Tony that Neumann would be tougher to beat than Walker, but have you seen Nuemann's plans?
Basically they are single bromides floated on a page with lots of white space, vs Barretts presentation bristling with programs and numbers.
I got to admit that out of the two, we would have less of a chance of the state crumbling under Neumann, but he is so damned dull that you have to make sure you aren't operating vehicles or heavy machinery while he is in office.
I agree that there's much fluff in Neumann's position book, but he is taking some positions that would make for a worthwhile fall debate.
The best example is Neumann's position on tax cuts, where he is promising homeowners that under his plan they can pay ZERO in property taxes in 2011 if they agree to make monthly property tax payments beginning in January of 2012. For the owner of a $100,000 home, that's an idea worth considering.
I don't know if Neumann's plan on cutting taxes property taxes can work (I'm sure the political hacks in the GOP/Dem caucuses have already butchered it to pieces in dozens of different ways), but it's an example of the kind of policy suggestion that should get top billing in a fall debate.
Under Walker v. Barrett, the "debate" is going to be about who is most responsible for destroying Milwaukee. I think Tom has done much less to destroy Milwaukee than Walker, but that's not saying much.
I voted for you for County Sheriff. Justice!
Hey Tony,
Is Scott Walker really a "weak" candidate? Yeah he's a terrible leader who would likely make an awful governor, but he keeps beating Barrett in the polls and it seems he has a pretty good shot at being our next governor. It sounds like the right is betting that his charisma, all-American smile and slogans will make up for a complete lack of leadership. So far Barrett's campaign has seemed to be in an uphill struggle. Do you think Walker's popularity will wane in the coming weeks once the people begin to grasp what he stands for, or is this just wishful thinking?
Well, as is typically the case in which there is no significant third party opposition, both major party candidates are weak. I will vote for Tom Barrett not out of any sense that he has some dynamic plan to reform the state, or the courage to do so, but simply because he's not nearly as bad as Walker. I suspect the majority of people voting for Barrett or Walker are thinking along similar lines ("My guy's not great, but the other guy's much worse.).
Barrett is seriously handicapped by the fact that Jim Doyle accomplished no major policy reforms in 8 years. When he came to power, we had a corrupt electoral system in the state; as he leaves, it is either marginally better of significantly worse (credible arguments can be made on both sides.). When Doyle came to power, we had a serious structural deficit; as he leaves it is worse. When he came to power the K-12 funding mechanism (which is implicated prominently in the deficit) was badly in need of reform; he leaves office with the same system that was in place 8 years ago. We can go on and on and on and on.
Having said all of that, Walker's campaign to this point has been, at best, clumsy and unfocused. Much like John Kerry in 2004, he became labeled a "flip-flopper"--a label I think he will have to shake before November in order to have a chance to win. (The corporate media will probably help him.).
Contrary to the fantasies coming out of WTMJ in Milwaukee and other right leaning sources, we saw little evidence of Tuesday of any widespread enthusiasm for Walker. Despite the hype, voter turnout around the state in most places was average to below average. In other words, if Walker wins it won't be because of widespread feelings that "this is the guy who can solve our problems." I think it will be more like, "this guy probably won't screw up as badly as the other guy."
Weak candidates always win elections in American politics, often because the voters only have two weak choices to choose from. --TP
Post a Comment