Misleading since 1976

Mother Jones would like you to believe a lot of things, and one of them is that Scott Walker’s funding advantage entirely owes to out-of-state donors. Here’s the chart they provide:

See? Walker’s pie is a lot bigger, AND the lion’s share of his money comes from out of state. I think we’re meant to get the impression that Walker’s campaign is deeply undemocratic. It’s winning on funding, and that funding is not coming from the people Walker’s running to govern.

Like most impressions one gets from reading Mother Jones, this is one we can fix with some basic math.

OK, Walker’s funding is 66%(approximately – wonder which way they rounded?) from out-of-state. Since there are only two categories here, that should imply that 34% of it comes from Wisconsin donors. 34% of 30.5million is $10.37million. Barrett’s funding is 26% from out-of-state, implying that 74% of it comes from in-state sources. 74% of 3.9million is $2.89million. So, Walker’s fundraising is kicking the pants off of Barrett even if we only talk about Wisconsin donations. Whatever you think about out-of-state donors, the people that Walker is running to govern still give him over three times as much money as they give his opponent.

Now, we don’t have a breakdown of where various donations are coming from. For all I know, everyone who donated to Barrett slipped him 20 dollar bills in reused tax return envelopes whereas Scott Walker’s donors all handed him stacks and stacks of gold bullion. Of course, if that were the case, MoJo would’ve been all over it, so lacking any evidence to the contrary, I’m just going to assume that out-of-state donations notwithstanding, Walker’s support at home is lot more enthusiastic than Barretts – which is what the polls tell us anyway. My point has just been that Mother Jones apparently has a pretty low opinion of its readers to think that a little basic elementary school multiplication is either beyond them, or else something they would be too lazy to do on their own.

Meanwhile, can I just say YAY? Not only did Walker win the ridiculous recall election, he actually performed better than in the original 2010 election – and against the same opponent. Whatever you think about Scott Walker personally, you should be able to agree that that’s a big win for democracy, law and order. The recall was spurred entirely by sour grapes from people who tried to shut down the legitimate legislature because it was voting on issues that everyone agrees are within the purview of the state legisature, they just didn’t like the results. Unlike their quorum-busting walkout last year, the recall is at least legal, but it still shows a basic lack of respect for the democratic process. This isn’t Egypt. There will be another election, on schedule, and you’ll have the opportunity to make your case then. Unless Scott Walker has done something fundamentally at odds with his mandate, and he hasn’t that I am aware of, the recall mechanism is being abused. It’s really rich that outlets like Mother Jones want to portray this as some kind of special interest trojan horse when it’s labor unions, labor unions, and then some labor unions behind the recall effort. Special interests are only special when they’re Republican, apparently.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>