Reply #61: Compared to 2006...he lost the Green Bay area, Racine and Kenosha [View All]

Why? Not because of money, but because these areas were hurting.

The 5 million dollars from the outside resulted in a ~5% difference. That's a shift of 2.5% of the vote. Johnson's win wasn't as strong as Feingold's in 2006. BUT, in 2010, the proportion of voters who turned out (and sister, voting machine fraud conspiracies aside, it's ALL about who turns out) over the entire state shifted toward republicans (and mostly against incumbents). The shift that got Feingold was about 3%.

Feingold's loss can't be seen as simply a matter of targeting him. Wisconsin went pretty much red all over. The state legislature went red. The governorship went red. Feingold's seat was lost, we were fortunate to hang on to Tammy Baldwin. Politicians in the state generally saw this coming from many months away. Exactly WHY do you think Obey hung it up? He was in a VERY powerful position. You think he just wanted to do something different with his grand kids?????????????????

Critically for Feingold, the Green Bay area went red and Racine and Kenosha went red. In 2008 there was a meager red stripe from the Green Bay suburbs south through Waukesha County, this year these two populatoin dense, critical, blue, areas became pink. Feingold held areas that he had represented in his earlier career, much of the state went lavender, but it wasn't enough.

In my own opinion as a resident, voters of Wisconsin voted their economic fear, their ignorance of Keynsian economics (supported by Feingold), and their disappointment in things as they are. As anyone who understands the impact of fear on staying the course on politics, the state went anti-incumbent and to the right.