What Scott Walker promised in the campaign is not the point
One of the issues that matter more generally is what this shows about the way we elect public officials. Just one example: Over the course of a long campaign a candidate's platform is distilled to a series of catch-phrases and talking-points. These talking-points are then repeated ad infinitum. Voters recognize that, and perhaps subconsciously their minds say, "Hey! We've been here and heard this. Yawn." After all, as I understand it, the brain evolved to respond more to novelty than to stasis. (I'll find documentation and add it. Suggestions welcomed.)
In other words, candidates might very well make promises during a campaign, but that doesn't mean the promises are being heard.
Progressives must find a way make sure that voters know exactly what conservatives are promising ... and what those promises will cost in human terms if the candidate is able win election and push through what he or she wants. That understanding will reach moderate Republicans as well as committed Democrats. Think of the "buyer's remorse" being expressed by many of those who put in office the far-right ideologues now in state and federal government.
And think also of the remorse of those who didn't even bother to vote. Wisconsin? If the same number of voters had turned out for Russ Feingold this time as did in his previous election, he would still be a U.S. senator.
|< In Politics, Nothing Happens by Accident | Popcorn, Road Rage, and Handguns >|