3 ms·

I developed a similar theory independently this week after learning about the loss of Feingold in Wisconsin, the only senator to vote against the Patriot Act.

I developed a similar theory independently this week after learning about the loss of Feingold in Wisconsin, the only senator to vote against the Patriot Act. One possible solution: extend TSA inspection authority to interstate RV travel.

_delirium 16y ago
That one was surprising, although in a general Republican-wave election I suppose a Democrat losing in a swing state can happen for various reasons. But I couldn't figure out who was actually supporting Ron Johnson (the new Senator). Just people who hate taxes? Libertarians were mostly not in favor, because Johnson had a really wishy-washy position on the Patriot Act, e.g. take a look at this RedState (conservative/libertarian site) analysis of his views: http://www.redstate.com/pompadour/2010/06/23/local-grassroots-group-vets-ron-johnson-part-4-the-patriot-act-polka/ http://www.redstate.com/pompadour/2010/06/23/local-grassroot... Or maybe that was actually the reason, because people take tough-on-terrorism as more important than civil liberties?
- vaksel 16y ago
  from what I understand, the reason Feingold lost, was because Johnson outspent him something like 10 to 1, mostly from the 8-9 million he donated to his own campaign. This is mostly from seeing reddit headlines, so that may very well be bs.
  - _delirium 16y ago
    Hmm, the numbers I can find show somewhat more even spending, so I'm not sure that's the reason. Ballpark estimates I'm seeing thrown around are something like $20m spent by the Feingold campaign, $17m spent by the Johnson campaign directly, and another $5m spent by anti-Feingold third parties. Maybe the 10-1 figure is for outside money? It does seem that almost all the third-party, from-outside-Wisconsin groups doing ad buys in the election were doing anti-Feingold ad buys.
    - jacoblyles 16y ago
      Reddit politics has been making up its own reality for a while now.
      - mkramlich 16y ago
        It ain't perfect but it's closer to real reality than much of what's on Fox News.
    - deleted 16y ago
      [deleted]

_delirium 16y ago

That one was surprising, although in a general Republican-wave election I suppose a Democrat losing in a swing state can happen for various reasons. But I couldn't figure out who was actually supporting Ron Johnson (the new Senator). Just people who hate taxes? Libertarians were mostly not in favor, because Johnson had a really wishy-washy position on the Patriot Act, e.g. take a look at this RedState (conservative/libertarian site) analysis of his views: http://www.redstate.com/pompadour/2010/06/23/local-grassroots-group-vets-ron-johnson-part-4-the-patriot-act-polka/ http://www.redstate.com/pompadour/2010/06/23/local-grassroot... Or maybe that was actually the reason, because people take tough-on-terrorism as more important than civil liberties?

vaksel 16y ago
from what I understand, the reason Feingold lost, was because Johnson outspent him something like 10 to 1, mostly from the 8-9 million he donated to his own campaign. This is mostly from seeing reddit headlines, so that may very well be bs.
- _delirium 16y ago
  Hmm, the numbers I can find show somewhat more even spending, so I'm not sure that's the reason. Ballpark estimates I'm seeing thrown around are something like $20m spent by the Feingold campaign, $17m spent by the Johnson campaign directly, and another $5m spent by anti-Feingold third parties. Maybe the 10-1 figure is for outside money? It does seem that almost all the third-party, from-outside-Wisconsin groups doing ad buys in the election were doing anti-Feingold ad buys.
  - jacoblyles 16y ago
    Reddit politics has been making up its own reality for a while now.
    - mkramlich 16y ago
      It ain't perfect but it's closer to real reality than much of what's on Fox News.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]