What I learned from the Walker Recall Fiasco

On Tuesday, we saw a historic and rare political event happening with the Recall Election of Gov. Scott Walker. We also noticed that there was a higher voter turning topping a little over 30% (as reported by the Appleton Post Crescent). Although it was an  interesting event that politicos will analyze from now until November, the current political state of Wisconsin is in much need of compromise and repair. Although you hear some political rhetoric about getting along, we are mostly hearing why their economic policy is better and how the other completely destroyed the jobs outlook of the state/city (Milwaukee).

Now what did I learn from this? Quite simply, this election throws a curveball in some politicos' minds about the voter not being rational in the sense of having a short mind-span when it comes to negative political events relating to a political candidate. The original frame of mind comes from how consumers have recently recently reacted to some economic tragedies of well knowing businesses. For example, one could notice consumers forgiving Ford quickly for their tire issue on their expeditions in the 90's and Toyota more recently with their brakes issue. Now, however, one could notice a difference in the Wisconsin voters based on the timeline the recall elections occur. 

One must remember that this all started back in February 2011 (over a year ago) when Gov. Walker introduced the collective bargaining bill to Wisconsin Residents. Once the law went into effect last summer, Wisconsin voters had to wait to petition a recall until the first year of the Governor's term was complete (per election law). Consider that timeline, many voters against the bill had to wait 6 months until they could start the whole process. Also considering all the media slip ups politicians make on almost a daily basis, many politicos did not think the recall election was overwhelmingly possible. Then, the news broke out about how the Democratic Party got over a million signatures, which surprised not only the Walker Campaign Team, but also myself.

We will have to wait and see what happens to Scott Walker in a few months when Barrett faces him in the general recall election, however I am curious what the Obama Campaign Team is thinking right now given this analysis. Considering 2 weeks is usually political eternity for political candidates, angry voters waiting impatiently for 6 months to recall a governor is a new twist in political strategy. Is 6 months for a controversial collective bargaining bill the same as a 2.5 year wait of angry voters wanting to kick Obama out due to his health care bill. Although I still think many voters are going to elect their candidate based on economic indicators, I am considering changing my mind about whether the healthcare bill will pop up as a strong secondary reason why an angry conservative voter will vote for Romney instead of Obama.  

Romney likely to win Presidential Nomination for Republicans

Yes, it does seem like there was a disappointing night for Mitt Romney and a promising one for Rick Santorum. However, the national spotlight has put negative attention on Santorum regarding his campaign's inability to file for being on several ballets in a handful of counties and/or states. As of this point, a safe assumption can be made that Romney will be the nomination winner, keeping his high campaign money spending, strong economic message, and pending no major screw ups (like a Howard Dean moment).

Although a comfortable prediction of his win can be made, his speech made in Massachusetts tonight could be a prelude to tactical mistakes that could cost him the candidacy or a second term in the White House if he wins the Presidential Election. He talked about balancing the budget by cutting unnecessary programs and pretty much undoing everything President Obama has done. The question that needs to be asked is if he over-promised tonight by telling his supporters of all the different taxes he wants to repeal, like the death tax and cutting taxes for businesses.

There is statistical evidence to place a bet on Mitt Romney winning due to the public opinion polls being reported in recent months. Many of the polls showed that the economy and deficit were one of the top concerns of Americans on the list. Then, there is a mixture of ranks between repealing Obama-Care, pro-life issues, and security. One can make a general correlation with what areas (regions, counties, states) presidential candidates won with those public opinion polls. For example, Mitt Romney were winning well populated areas that have economically established Republican voters. This gives Romney the economy candidate which gives him a statistical edge. Gingrich showed himself being a regionally south candidate while Romney being the leader of rural and Christian conservatives. 

Friday Mike Out Podcast (2/24/2012)

Welcome to Friday Mike Out, I am your host Mike Lampe from the situationalist.

These are your top three headliners from the week

1. Rick Santorum was the momentum candidate going into Wednesday's Presidential Debate. However he seemed to have slipped! It was, instead, Mitt Romney acting like the comeback kid, acting strong although a little stiff.

2. Things are getting interesting in Wisconsin Politics. Governor Scott Walker has seen better days considering the recall election pending to happen and his former aids indicted for illegally campaigning.

There is a bright side to Walker's troubles. There seems to be a hint of hesitation among liberals regarding the potential Democratic Recall Candidates. Along with poll numbers, this can be shown by the hype Russ Feingold got after telling Stephen Colbert on Comedy Central he is not looking to run.

3. Going back to Wednesday's blog, a new Marquette University Law School Poll indicates Obama still beating all potential Republican Candidates... This means the contraception issue did not affect him as much as some political commentators thought it would.

That is it for your Friday Mike Out from the Situationalist... Have a good weekend!

Election 2012: Obama's Win with Contraception Fiasco?

Welcome to The Situationalist beginning of Coverage of Election 2012!


Two weeks ago, it was made known that the Obama Administration had implemented a rule that forced religious institutions to cover the use of contraceptives to women that were asking for it. The media focused on the expressed anger of Catholic Bishops who oversaw Catholic medical centers and universities housing health services for their students. One could say this was another run of the mill when it comes to Democrats standing for Women's Issues while Republicans show their loyalty to the religious right.

However, one should wonder why the Obama Administration implemented this rule considering social issues have not been brought before in this election cycle. Why give the Republicans a reason to rally up a constituency that had been dormant for the last year and a half? Although some are calling foul and others are calling this an embarrassing move by the Obama campaign machine, it is interesting what has happened since this event occurred. Below are the events that occurred starting with the implementation of the policy:

1. Media recognizes implementation of the contraception policy
2. Political outcry by Catholic Leaders and other social conservatives
3. Rick Santorum (R) gains bump in the polls for his strong stance on social issues
4. Mitt Romney loses ground to Santorum and loses a handful of primaries
5. President Obama announces compromise given political outcry

Intentional or not, the Obama Administration has been able to shake up the Republican Primary in the short run which has made it harder for conservatives to fully back Romney as their Republican Nominee. Some political commentators are speculating that Santorum has become the momentum candidate which could lead to nomination. Although the Republicans will eventually unite to nominate a presidential candidate, The Obama Administration has been able to indirectly make political campaign contributions to Republicans more sporadic.

Blog/Article by The Situationalist - Mike Lampe

Obama and the "Buffett" Rule

As stated in a previous article, President Obama's Administration has provided details on the Jobs Plan he promised to release after Labor Day. This plan is set to cost around 300 Billion Dollars and seems to be round 2 of where Speaker Boehner and the President ended last time while discussing the debt ceiling. 

Besides the tax cuts that are set to give incentives for businesses to hire within the United States, media outlets are hooked on has been coined the "Buffett" Rule. Obama discussed the situation in which Warren Buffett, A successful investor on Wall Street, pays less taxes that his receptionist does.

Therefore, the Obama Administration proposed that when "Buffett"-like tax situations millionaires get into,  their taxes would default to the middle class tax rate. Thus eliminating the complicated minimum alternative tax as well as changing the concept of a "flat tax," only the flat tax would be for the wealthy income earners. 

In the article, Lampe: Its the Economy Stupid, Mike Lampe had recommended to get rid of the Bush Tax Cuts to the rich and implement a tax break that is more job specific. Although not getting rid of the Bush Tax Cut for the wealthy entirely, this approach sends a message of compromise and the perception that fresh ideas are going through the Oval Office at the White House. 

Although it is quite clear that Obama will not get everything he asks for, it will be interesting to see how the Republicans will respond to this bill. There is already the anti-tax movement of the Republican Party that suggest the government should not tax "job creators."

Lampe: Its the Labor Markets Stupid... (Obama announces Jobs Plan after Labor Day)

Prior to the new Jobs Plan President Obama is set to announce after Labor Day, the un- and underemployed people in the United States are asking, 'what have you done for us lately?' With unemployment at over 9%, both Democratic and Republican officials are trying to pitch the failure of the other party.

Let's face it, the Republicans are being hypocritical by slashing social programs and fundraising machines from Democrats (unions) without touching revenues; and Democrats are asking to keep key governmental programs without putting much of a fight to keep revenues (taxes) on the table.

But all this bickering does not solve the issue at hand. Yes, the federal budget will help ease political uncertainty in the markets, but it will not do much to increase employment as dramatically as the public wants. Although the Republicans' minds are in the right place, they are not thorough in their tax cut approach for the high income earners.

Would it not be a fair compromise to replace the high income tax break for a tax break specifically for companies employing people in the United States?

MAKING IT SIMPLE: Remember in school where we learned the basic process of our economy. You had the banks, industries, and the laborers. The bank would loan money to the industries to invest in their businesses. After the business is set up, they would pay employees to run the business. When the employees get paid, they go back to the banks and industries to start the process over again and expand the economy.

The question for our time is this, 'Are we becoming too efficient?' If we are not giving people the opportunity to earn money then spend it in the US Economy, does that mean the economy slows down because goods and services are not being purchased by the consumer powerhouse of Americans?

My three points of what I would ask President Obama to do:
1. Expire the tax cuts to the higher income brakets
2. Reform former tax cuts into a job-creating tax cut
3. Initiate these steps in your new jobs plan


Blog/Article by the Situationalist - Mike Lampe

CANDIDATE SPOTLIGHT: Michele Bachmann Sees More Than Russia From Her Window

For those of you who remember the Tea Party Response of the State of the Union Address, most people met Michele Bachmann as a woman with guts but with a few loose screws. Along with that, she was caught up with making 'anti-American' comments while on Hardball with Chris Matthews.

Fast foward to the Presidential Debate Monday night, things are starting to turn around for the presidential hopeful. Although Ron Paul had the most gain from the debate, most people do not see him as becoming a candidate for the Republican Party. The next person that actually did not put themselves in an ackward position was Michele Bachmann.

One might have to ask how she was able to pull off becoming a possible front runner. Easy, you add Ed Rollins (well known political strategist) and straight confident talk of beating President Obama; you're in. Unlike Gingrich, it seems like she is following the directions of her advisors.

The next test for Bachmann will be coming soon. Although it may be too late for Palin to jump in due to Bachmann's success, Gov. Rick Perry (R-Texas) will be another potential savior for the conservative movement.  If either of these candidates continue to be straight and smart with the American People, you won't see Mitt Romney be the frontrunner for much longer.

Blog/Article by the Situationalist - Mike Lampe

BREAKING NEWS: Ron Paul Wins Republican Debate Tonight

After watching the Republican Debate on CNN, it was interesting to see the strategy of all presidential candidates. Of course, you saw Romney separate himself from Romneycare and Gingrich lowering the severity of his staff walking out. The other candidates seem to be playing it safe in order not to lose points.

I can say that Michele Bachmann seemed to have come from the deep end and swam somewhat back to shore with how she presented herself. Even though she was playing it safe, she actually scored points doing it because she was a passionate tea partier.

However, I announce Ron Paul having gained the most points in my scorecard. I truly believed that he has become the new "straight talk express" candidate of the Republican Party (from McCain). On top of that, he has the most consistency when it comes to cutting the deficit from the federal budget. Not only did he talk about policies that removes public spending from the free market, but he also attacked foreign policy spending.

I know Ron Paul has a lot more to do in order to become a mainstream candidate, but he has a potential to become a viable candidate if things start to get worse. Whether you like it or not, President Obama's Campaign Machine is better than the Clinton Machine. Therefore, the Republican Candidate must be real with the American People while trying to attack the "professorial" and "glorious" approach of President Barack Obama.

The Situationalist,
Mike