Posted on

Clifford Loses Supreme Court Race

Maybe its still too close to call, but Nichols is right.

It is no secret that Supreme Court candidate Linda Clifford is going to need a big win in Dane County to prevail statewide over Washington County Judge Annette Ziegler.

But with almost 13,000 Dane County votes county, the split is Clifford 53 percent, Ziegler 47 percent.

This is really sad. I do believe that if Clifford ran a solid campaign on the issues she would be in the lead right now. There is no reason that Clifford should have not been able to carry Dane County by a healthy 70% margin, but I do not think that will happen tonight.

I have done my fair share of research on Clifford and all I know is her Dad was a tool and die caster. I know very little about how her being an Assistant AG would have helped on the Supreme Court. Clifford and her Democratic posse gambled on a strategy of giving voters as little information as possible about her, while simultaneously attacking Ziegler like a pit bull. I think its fair to say that such a strategy back fired.

I do hope, another race appears to be on the horizon, that the next left of center candidate will not be shy about defining him / herself. We need to move beyond the irrelevant of activist judge and judicial restraint. While particular cases or potential ones may be off limits that does not mean the federal and state constitutions should be. It matters if a justice will choose civil liberties over government power, right of privacy over corporate and government desire to know, or workers rights over corporate exploitation. I do hope the next candidate does not shy away from these very important issues.

Advertisements

7 responses to “Clifford Loses Supreme Court Race

  1. jody

    “..her Democratic posse gambled on a strategy of giving voters as little information as possible about her”

    That is what the Dems have been doing in race after race. Running from overt statements of position and “hiding” candidates. Drives me nuts. How they cannot see this comes off as cowardice and is self-defeating is beyond me but when I talk everyone seems only to hear White Noise. I mean, I’ve been harping on that since last summer, but the Dem sweeps masked the phenom anyway – anti-neo-con is NOT necessarily pro-Dem, but whatever. Time will tell how deep the Dem love is, or if that was just a wave of sheer frustration we saw in Nov.

    I also thought the Ziegler stuff was way overkill as I think I made pretty clear. So I think you know I agree with you totally on that. I salute your digging into Clifford’s history – quite pro-acitve. I didn’t bother. It’s not my job really as a voter if they don’t promote their own candidate after all that money was spent.

    As to your hopes about upcoming election strategies – I don’t look for change myself. If anything has been proven time and time again is that Party Ops and paid Professional Mind-Fockers do not think AT ALL like regular citizens do. But they need to keep their paychecks coming in so will stay in denial and will continue to pretend they have their fingers on the pulse of the nation.
    And as long as it all works for the people already at the table that’s all that matters anyway, and the system will self-perpetuate/escalate. People think it’s fun and exciting, makes them money too – so what the hell. No motive for change. Zip.

    C ya then…

  2. I agree. What really perplexes me is that folks think this kind of campaigning works. The Dems will run these types of campaigns and in the same breath complain that voting will be under 20% like there is no relationship there.

    Thanks for comment.

  3. Ben

    Clifford and her Democratic posse gambled on a strategy of giving voters as little information as possible about her, while simultaneously attacking Ziegler like a pit bull. I think its fair to say that such a strategy back fired.

    I agree with that. Clifford ran an embarassing campaign that made me ashamed to be a supporter. I don’t think the indictment can be as easily widened to progressive candidates in general, or to the Democratic Party.

    We definitely have our problems with political consultants who are divorced from reality and who don’t really know how to win elections, although this problem is not unique to the Dems. (Mark Green’s laughable gubernatorial campaign is an example on the other side.) And the best candidates can rise above the consulting game, anyways.

    Clifford was constrained by the fact that it was a judicial campaign, and thus technically non-partisan and apolitical. It’s hard to make a positive appeal on something other than biography and experience. It’s easy to go negative. The Ziegler campaign was at least as dirty as Clifford’s. But they had way more money, and Clifford was unable to make a positive case to overcome that hurdle.

  4. 1. I believe I pointed the indictment at Democratic bloggers not the party as a whole. I have no problem with attacking especially when its on the issues, but you have to define yourself.

    2. I think its fair to say that with a race such as Supreme Court it is set up in such a way that negative is the only way to campaign. I NOTAed all the other judges on the ballot because I had no info to make a reasonably educated decision. It seems to me that ones understanding of the constitutions and how that would impact their rulings as a judge are very pertinent.

    3. The money issue is load of crap unless you can prove me otherwise. Their individual / family contribution match up pretty evenly as well as outside contributors. This election was not about one side not being able to compete because of money.

  5. Ben

    I believe I pointed the indictment at Democratic bloggers not the party as a whole.

    “Party Ops and paid Professional Mind-Fockers” who “need to keep their paychecks coming” is a pretty inaccurate description of Democratic bloggers, or the Democratic grass-roots. I just assumed you were talking about the political consultant class.

  6. That wasn’t me LOL.

    I have Jody comment every now and then so I can assume the role of reason.

    I do think there are bloggers more concerned with being a democratic blogger than being bloggers who are Democrats. I would categorize you as the latter. You are much more concerned with the larger issues than the Dems talking points of the minute.

    But there are others where blogging is less about blogging than controlling a message similar to campaign ads. I took Jody’s comment as directed toward those PMF’s.

  7. Ben

    Oh, oops. I totally misread that. Fair enough, and point taken. (And thanks for the compliment.)

Comments are closed.