"This Is the End of Democracy"


The only appropriate way to describe your failure to recall a candidate who was democratically elected and then democratically kept in office:

NEXT: Poll: Only 10 Percent of Americans Think the Drug War Is a Success, 66 Percent Think It's a Failure

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Somebody needs a hug.

    1. And a juice box.

      Honestly, the combo of his accent and the man-crying is a little nauseating to me. I can't even get my Schadenfreude on properly about this.

      1. "Awww. You want your binky? Huh? How about your teddy? C'mon, who's a brave pipe-fitter?"

      2. I can't even get my Schadenfreude on properly about this.

        Nicole..this is reason.com...we expect that you will always be able to summon any degree of Schadenfreude appropriate to the situation!

      3. MALE GAZE! There ya go!

        1. If I find out later that you have a WI accent, Groovus, I am going to be very disappointed. And I may find all these male gazes retroactively nonfunctional.

          1. No worries on the accent, nicole. Mine is decidedly a mixture of nor'easter and an Okie twang. THE GAZE *never* FAILS!

    2. Give the man a break, he didn't get his way.... IT IS JUST LIKE WHAT HITLER DID TO THE JEWS!

  2. If only he were correct, then this country might actually stand a chance.

    1. Democracy is the ultimate ideal, I could care less how many rights have to be sacrificed in order to reach that ideal.

  3. My appetite for your tears cannot be quenched. Please keep crying.

  4. Oh, the tears of unfathomable sadness! My-yummy. ....Mm-yummy you guys!

  5. That was hilarious.

  6. The only appropriate way to describe your failure to recall a candidate who was democratically elected and then democratically kept in office

    This reporter really should have hammered him on that point.

    We just got outspent 34 million to 4 million dollars.

    So what you are saying is that your people don't believe in this cause enough to put their money in?

    1. they keep tossing out financial figures that may have no resemblance to reality. Who knows how much various unions really spent? I wonder if this whiner has any issues with the huge money Obama raised and spent in '08, or more likely, is money only an issue when they have it.

    2. We just got outspent 34 million to 4 million dollars.

      As that video continues to go viral, I suspect we'll hear more and more people quote that stat as a fact. But I'm not about to take what some crying union guy claims as fact--just because he says so.

      Here's what I dug up from Reuters:

      Walker had raised $31 million to Barrett's $4.2 million by May 21, with about 70 percent of Walker's 2012 donations coming from out-of-state donors, according to finance reports compiled by the watchdog group.

      Out-of-state Conservative groups such as Americans for Prosperity, funded by the billionaire conservative brothers Charles and David Koch, also poured millions into Wisconsin and filled the state's airwaves with anti-Barrett ads.

      A late push by Democrat-aligned groups helped close the gap. The Wisconsin Democracy Campaign estimated Republican groups spent $18 million in the state and Democratic groups, mostly union-backed, spent $15.5 million.



      Barrett may have spent only $4.2 million--that he raised himself. But, the unions also spent $15.5 million on Barret's behalf.

      It wasn't $34 million to $4 million. At worst, it looks to me like it was $34 million to about $20 million.

      1. Don't forget all the "news coverage" the main stream media gave to oust Walker. That never seems to figure into the spending amounts.

        1. Yeah, they get a lot of free press.

          For every union rally that gets covered, no one puts an average Joe on camera, while he's sitting in his living room, and asks him what he thinks about the bloated pensions of government employees.

        2. And all the sick pay that the union protesters collected while trying to get on TV.

      2. Plus the whole argument about money tends to be at least partially irrelevant. Given the coverage this election got, you had to be in a cave or Mars to not understand the issues. Given that, the money argument seems to be: "We would have won the recall. But, when all that money was spent, all the lobotomized people out there suddenly voted not to recall just because of an ad they saw on TV."

        1. You're right.

          Most people said they were decided back in May. There were very few undecided in the run up to the election--and a ton of the money that was spent was spent for those few undecided people.

          Walker won by 9 points! All those millions spent won him, at most, a few percent. You need to spend enough to stay relevant, but if the unions had an extra $15 million to spend (the real funding gap), it wouldn't have gotten them another 9 points.

          They would have lost anyway.

          1. nah, it seems like people made their decision two years ago when the exact same candidates squared off the first time a couple years ago.

            What, you mean my vote didn't really count the first time?

            It's a Traveshamockery!

      3. Assuming 30% of the population are democrats, and they only raised $4 million, that means each Democrat only chipped in 4?.

        4 pennies to prevent the "End of America"?

        Plus, Obama has a war-chest of over $1 Billion. He couldn't spare $20 million or so? That's chump change.

        The reality is that Democrats knew they were going lose the recall no matter what, so they didn't waste the party's money on it.

        1. "Assuming 30% of the population are democrats, and they only raised $4 million, that means each Democrat only chipped in 4?."

          You don't expect Democrats to spend their own money do you?

      4. Hell, the CNN reporter said that $60 million was spent on the election. If Walker spent 34, that means Barrett spent 26. Not exactly a huge margin there.

        1. Ummmm...no, dummy. It obviously means that the democrats spent $4 million and Walker spent $56 million! Duh!

    3. The second biggest advantage that Walker had was that the chairman of the RNC, Reince Priebus, is the former head of the Wisconsin GOP. Which is to say, he has both the local knowledge of what it takes to win on the ground in Wisconsin, and he has a national stage from which to raise money. That was an ideal position to be in from both a strategic and fundraising perspective.

      But the biggest advantage Walker had was that the people of Wisconsin support what Walker's done, and they don't want to see him recalled.

      The unions must think very little of the people of Wisconsin to think they could force a popular governor out--despite the people of Wisconsin wanting to keep him.

      1. The unions must think very little of the people of Wisconsin to think they could force a popular governor out--despite the people of Wisconsin wanting to keep him.


        Unions don't care about people or the workers, they care about gaining even more political power. Nothing more.

    4. So what you are saying is that your people don't believe in this cause enough to put their money in?

      Ding ding ding!!!

      This was a union pet cause from the very beginning, NOT a nationwide Team BLUE cause which, though they often overlap one another and unions almost always carry water for Team BLUE and vice-versa, are NOT the same things.

  7. What he means when he says "democracy", and what I mean when I say "democracy"? I don't think we mean the same thing.

    For instance, when he's talking about democracy, he's talking about public employee unions holding the taxpayers hostage, and the voters having no way to address out of control pension costs whatsoever.

    When I'm talking about democracy, I'm talking about taxpayers and voters being free to make their own choices.

    See? Not the same thing.

    1. These assholes seem to think that it is only real democracy if the voters are only exposed to information that they approve of.

      As I read what I just typed, it just seems absurd, but I can't think of a better way to describe it. It's as if they really can't believe that a well informed person could possibly honestly disagree.

  8. If this is the afterparty for democracy, the collapse was worth it.

  9. It's easy to laugh at pathetic losers like guy. But all kidding aside, with the pending collapse of the welfare state in the west, we're entering into a dangerous period in world history.

    When guys like this reach the point of desperation, they're going to start violently lashing out at productive society. Within a few years from now, we're likely to see the kind of civil unrest and violence in the streets that most of us haven't really experienced in our lifetime.

    1. That being said, this tends not to be the group that is armed very well.

      1. Yes, but like Trayvon Martin, they have the "law" on their side.

        1. Not that that worked out well for Martin, regardless of the outcome.

          1. True enough. The thing is, productive members of society don't really want to get Zimmermanned for defending themselves. It would have to be a real riot.

    2. I don't think so. Is there any reason to believe that the BS tactics employed by the Union members in Minn. for the last year (sit-ins, minor property damage, rallies, occasional fights) would really be escalated to a new level? I just think culturally we're miles apart from the Greeks.

      1. Also, Greek property owners don't have guns. It's hard to get your riot on when you're getting shot at.

        1. Somehow I don't think that these riots would be a problem here in the Intermountain West. But "Mayors against 'illegal' guns" is trying to make sure they will be in a lot of big cities.

          1. It's unfortunate that many rural Americans believe that in such a situation they will prevail just because they're "good, clean-livin', God-fearin' honest country-folk with rifles and shotguns against effete, dandified city goons and thugs." In my experience, most people overestimate their proficiency in shooting and tactics, and underestimate the sheer ferociousness of a desperate man.

            Remember, there will be a lot more of 'them' then you, and they will have absolutely nothing to lose. Also, as the Zulus proved in the Battle of Isandlwana, superior arms do not and cannot win a battle alone.

            1. You're missing a point. People riot in their own cities -- usually their own neighborhoods. There won't be a lot more of 'them', hundreds or thousands of miles from home. Rioters are also not long on logistics.

              WRT "tactics" I'll take people who actually hunt for their meat, over a bunch of tacticool nutjobs every day.

              Contrary to what people think, there are more wannabe militiamen in urban areas, than in farther-flung places.

              That said, who says where I live is "rural"?

            2. I live far enough from town that they couldn't make the round trip drive in their Volt, so I'm not really all that worried.

            3. I think you spelled 'Rorke's Drift' wrong.

        2. As tarran notes below, it would be a case of asymmetric warfare.

      2. "I just think culturally we're miles apart from the Greeks."

        Never read any Aristophanes, I guess...

          1. Yes, Aristophanes shows that the Greeks have long been similar in ridiculousness to Americans.

            Their society has had a few thousand more years to get lazy, though.

    3. It will start with bombings.

      1. This.

        You have your finger on the pulse of the quote-unquote anarchists, tarran 🙂

      2. and it will escalate until that first person whose store/house/person is being attacked pulls out a gun and uses it. Goons and thugs are only powerful until their targets start firing back.

        This election was one form of backlash. There will be other forms, if necessary.

        1. That's why it will be bombs.

          They'll take a page from the eco-terrorists who already use them - the same thing done to SUV dealerships and research labs using animals will be done to the homes of businessmen, or homes of people who are class enemies.

          Bombs are wonderful if you want to be far away and have minimal personal risk of getting caught. They'll rationalize away the deaths of innocents using phrases like "nits become lice". Also, if one is creative, one can cause the bomb to be triggered by the victim doing some symbolically evil act or going to some symbolically evil place allowing one to blame the victim for triggering the bomb.

          One aspect of bombings that make them the worst type of political violence IMO, is the anonymity encourages retaliation towards people who are thought to belong to the group that committed the bombing. This occurred in Turkey; leftists would bomb some rightist gathering, so the rightists would go and kill them some leftists who had nothing to do with the bombers but a common ideology.

        2. Just like the L.A. Riots stopped when Korean deli owners began defending themselves with shotguns?

          Underestimate the Rawles-ian "Golden Horde" at your own risk.

          1. LA contains a critical mass of people ready to loot if they can get away with it, and a larger apathetic mass of people who don't really care.

            Not all cities have a similar ratio.

            Live in a place like LA too long, and one tends to forget that.

      3. It wouldn't surprise me if these nimrods were to start bombing. I could actually see these fanatics emulating al Qaeda tactics.

        1. Hmmm... Designing a "Let's Roll!" variant of the Gadsden flag as we speak. Might as well profit from this possibility. Al Qaeda is not a very popular group among average American types...

          1. Snake striking, text "LET'S ROLL"...awesome.

        2. I could actually see these fanatics emulating al Qaeda tactics.

          I wonder if the FBI would ever figure it out, or are they too busy making their own terrorists. Of course you know that would mean we would have to give even more power to investigate "radicals."

        3. What was that you said? Domestic drone strikes?

        4. Hey, it worked out so well politically (or otherwise) for the Japanese, Al Qaeda, the KKK, extreme pro-lifers, etc.

      4. Like Madison in 1970?

    4. No we're not. There is a very, very slight possibility of it, but it is by no means "Likely." Far more likely he will get a low-level menial job somewhere, be unhappy with the amount he earns and start to try to figure out ways to move up to a better job.

      1. I truly hope you're right, but I don't think you are.

        I think you're underestimating just how deranged the modern left has become, and what desperate people are capable of doing.

        1. I tend to agree. I'm not sure people who have been made dependent on the welfare state will turn into productive citizens once the dole is turned off. We're talking about people who have been come to accept their "entitlements" as a way of life and a birthright. This dude is crying over modest reforms that merely required union members to pay a little bit more for healthcare and pensions. Now imagine the reaction when government-funded pensions and free health care are scaled back on a massive scale.

          These people are convinced that it is their right to receive money for nothing, just as much as you are convinced that you have a right to free speech. I don't think the dependent class and their enablers on the left see any difference between the two, and violence can easily erupt when the gravy train ends.

          1. Wasn't there a scene in Atlas Shrugged where a gang of "workers" rush the train to loot the people on it?

            I could definitely see that happening if these pricks continue to not get their way.

          2. KC's point speaks to what has happened in Greece - the dole has been turned off and folks don't like it. Since they grew accustomed to getting free things, they blame someone else for the cut off.

    5. When this candy ass and his buddies come and start a drum circle around my house I'll be there to greet them with my porch sweeper--holds thirty rounds.

  10. I see another man that needs a juice box and a Woobie. I cannot get enough of this!

    1. Thank you, I just wasted wayyy too much time reading the Doctor Who section of that. now I must go rewatch last season.

  11. Would I get in trouble if I founded a 501(c)(3) that offered free access to whatever means of suicide he/she chose, for the 24 hours following any election?

    Probably would... Damn...

    1. Well, first of all, you'd be missing out on a huge profit opportunity, and you'd have to turn in your monocle.

      1. Like the Mastercard commercials say, there are some things money can't buy...

        1. Like the Mastercard commercials say, there are some things money can't buy...

          So you would only take precious metals??

        2. Speaking of Mastercard, just instruct all your clients to put the suicide on their credit card. You collect, mastercard never does. And the monocle twirls with impunity.

    2. Well, first of all, you'd be missing out on a huge profit opportunity, and you'd have to turn in your monocle.

      1. Does he have one for each eye?

        1. That's the other reason I don't mind turning in one of them.

  12. "It's only democracy when I win."

    1. Exactly.

      TPIAW, democracy is working when it gives me power and it's not working when it gives my opponent power.

      1. They already have a Dictatorship of the Proletariat in place when the plebes wont go along with them. It's called the bureaucracy.

    2. Of course not. Democracy is rule by the people. The unions are the people. The other people, the ones not in the unions? They're not the people. Only the people are the people.

  13. I feel bad about laughing at this guy...er wait.. no I don't. These idiots recalled Walker on what boils down to a procedural dispute brought on by democrats running away from their duty to vote on legislation. The legislation itself, was a pretty mild check on some public sector unions.

    If you listen to people like this guy, it was Walker destroying the rights of workers everywhere, and putting us all under the thumb of the evil billionaires...Seriously...

  14. This little creep is reminiscent of the notorious "pony tailed guy" from the 1992 Richmond Virginia debates. His name was Denton Walthall and his moment of hilarious and also frightening drivel can be recalled here:



    1. "The focus of my work as a domestic mediator is meeting the needs of the children that I work with, by way of their parents, and not the wants of their parents. And I ask the three of you, how can we, as symbolically the children of the future president, expect the two of you, the three of you to meet our needs, the needs in housing and in crime and you name it?."

      Sums up progressive "thought" pretty well.

      1. "Take care of myself?! What?! That's what the government is for!"

      2. A child's biggest need is going to be coming up with the scratch to pay back what the government borrowed while he was still in the womb.

  15. Game over man. I love it. I just can't hear this enough.

    1. "Game over man"

      That's exactly what it reminded me of as well. He even sounds a little like Bill Paxton.

      1. I was thinking the same thing - "GAME OVER, MAN.... GAME OVER..."
        What a spineless little asswipe.

        You know what, your side lost - there's always a losing side. This either means you were wrong or you have to try harder. Instead you milk it for ridiculous hyperbole and rightfully make yourself a laughingstock.

      2. I was thinking it was like hearing the lamentations of their women, and the lamentations were: GAME OVER, MAN. GAME OVER.

  16. Guess what, Democrats. You were outspent because Obama wasn't willing to share the DNC loot for a losing cause. You got a problem with that you take it up with him.

    1. Seems he couldn't afford to fly there to help out, either.
      Guess his comps were all used up with the kids going to Mexico.

  17. The sweetness and yumminess of these tears is pure ambrosia to my soul.

  18. I feel his pain. I said the exact same thing when when the unions defeated Schwarzenegger's referendums.

    Democracy is soooooo over!


  20. There is a good rule to follow when trying a case. If you act like if a fact of consequence is true it will be the end of the world, it probably will be. Same thing here. These people have made a bad defeat worse by pretending some fairly mild restraints on unionism are the end of the world.

    And I kind of feel sorry for the Democratic national leaders. What do you do when a good portion of your grass roots support is batshit insane?

    1. Note of late, there are democratic leaders who are back tracking on the anti-capitalist rants. Showing signs they are thinking of the future of their party after Obama, and what they are stuck with. Sure democrats HATE to be called socialist, but when your rhetoric is all about shitting on capitalism nonstop what word could be more appropriate? Some leaders are smart enough to see what a losing proposition that is for them post Obama, but do they even have a constituency who understands that?

      1. I'll just add one more thing, my appreciation doesn't rest on one particular work but the fact he could write a damn good paragraph, and everyone of his stories were littered with those moments of intense synthesis of word and scene.

        1. And again, the wrong thread, swoosh. I blame it on my lust for IPAs. Haven't had any since last night, but I'm a weak man for liking those things anyway.

    2. What do you do when a good portion of your grass roots support is batshit insane?


      1. CPAC? Really? And I think the number of Democrats who believe this is the end of the world and Democracy greatly exceeds the number of Republicans who think Obama was born in Kenya. And last I looked Obama was pretty keen on bombing Iran or at least letting Israel do it.

        Don't let your delusions get in the way of reality.

        D- trolling.

        1. John|6.6.12 @ 1:48PM|#

          CPAC? Really?


          You don't remember the *stealth jihad* of 2011?? How CAIR infiltrated the conservative movement and was gradually leading them all to SHARIA LAW??

          Who needs that, even (ridiculous as it was), when you have the *ground zero mosque* 'controversy'?

          And come now John, that's not *trolling*. Its pointing out the obvious kook-themes of TEAM RED, which you may write off as "not as prevalent"... (a difference in magnitiude, if none in kind?)... which is a pretty weak qualifier. "*Somewhat less* crazy-stupid" /= Good.

          When I troll, you'll know it. 🙂

  21. After watching the face slap downblog, and now this... these people are unhinged.

    1. They're heathens.

  22. I want a martini made of his tears.

  23. This non-story was boring from day one, but it was almost worth it to see Rachel Maddow trying to figure out why, oh why, oh why, oh why! could anyone who prefers Obama to Clinton not join in trying to recall a governor who dared launch such a vicious and unprovoked attack on the pay and benefits of unionized government workers, as if all Obama supporters are "progressives" or something.

    1. I meant to say "prefers Obama to Romney", but they're all basically the same anyway.

  24. His tear is very delicious.

  25. It's like they've beheaded Ned Stark all over again...

    1. Ned Stark was a man of honor...

      1. Ugh. Ned was an annoying, self-righteous prat. Do not miss him at all.

        1. An annoying, self-righteous prat with no survival skills, as evidenced by his ultimately fatal ability to always make the worst possible choice.

          1. Ned Stark was a libertarian...

  26. The Koch brothers control the entire known Universe, according to the Left.

    1. My coworkers were discussing Citizens United today (as a derivative of the Walker election), and someone brought up how the Koch brothers were funding a bunch of stuff due to super PACS and how horrible that was.

    2. Mark F.|6.6.12 @ 12:07PM|#

      The Koch brothers control the entire known Universe

      pppt. And even THEY are just puppets of the Spacing Guild

  27. "it's still real to me, damnit!!!"

  28. This Is the End of Democracy

    Promises, promises.

    I used to get my hopes up, but those damned elections just keep on happening.

    Maybe one day.....

  29. "It's the end of the world as we know it"

    ...and I feel fine:)

  30. Oh, Reason, can you use this version of the interview instead? Much cleaner: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jy8FSyI_Djg .

  31. Say, did something happen yesterday? Anyone have any idea why the Dow is up like a rocket?

      1. Oh, yeah. That makes me feel much better.

  32. Normally I try to avoid TEAM RED TEAM BLUE shit, but I saw on a TV this morning that Walker had won, and said out loud "Suck it, libs!"

    1. I didn't hear Walker say "Suck it, libs!"

      If he had, I figure the media would be playing it up more.

      Oh, wait...

  33. It's an especially nice video for me. I live in Wisconsin. I voted yesterday. As I generally vote Libertarian now a days, it was nice to have the people I voted for actually win. The vote I caste seemed a lot like democracy in action to me.

    As for funding...Barrett was only the Democratic nominee for the month leading into the election. How much did the other candidates and Democratic party spend over the months before the petition and then all the demonstrations and hubbub before the recall primaries. Even if they spent less the sure got a heck of a lot of free advertisement from the media.

  34. The YouTube clip does this interview serious injustice. You have to watch the hi-res version in order to truly appreciate it. The guy's facial expression is reminiscent of a four year old that just witnessed a feral cat devour a baby bunny.


    1. The Kochtopus ate my babee!


    1. Not until a virus is developed that kills only hardcore Team members.

  36. Public Sector Unions fail to strongarm government into doing their bidding = "Failure of democracy"

    Government 'stimulus' fail to produce jobs = "Republican obstructionism"

    Economy implodes due to decades of loose money, sub-prime lending mandates, preverse govt incentives producing negative returns on traditional savings, forcing capital into alternative asset classes = "Failure of Capitalism"

    Millenial generation's flagship company, Facebook, completely overvalues itself, faceplants on IPO, loses individual investors 38% if they bought day 1 = "The Bankers Done Took Ar Monies! NO FAIR"

    cue the police, "I can't stand losing"

    1. Millenial generation's flagship company, Facebook, completely overvalues itself, faceplants on IPO, loses individual investors 38% if they bought day 1 = "The Bankers Done Took Ar Monies! NO FAIR"

      But it was a high-profile IPO. High-profile IPO's usually see a bounce in share price. There was supposed to be a bounce. A bounce dammit! We were entitled to a bounce, and now someone's gotta' pay.

      1. You don't need to be an equities analyst (cough) to have done a back-of-envelope valuation that put the fair value of the stock around $20-24. Perhaps more like in the mid-high teens if their topline growth keeps slowing down at the current rate. They started off with a proposed strike of $28-$32? THEN kicked that up 20%+ at the last minute. They set themselves up for a crash in price. My guess is they expected hype to keep the thing afloat for at least a few months (until first earnings/end of lockout period I guess) The fact is, unless they unveil some really novel new way to monetize their user base, they're a glorified Yahoo, and deserve a forward P/E multiple in the mid 20s, at best. Any idiot could have seen it coming. The articles I've seen bemoaning the 'failure' of the IPO have been ridiculous. I continue to be amazed at the range of stupid in the economic/financial journalism sphere, but guess I shouldn't be - they're journalists first, and have a pretty mass-psychosis attitude towards how markets work anyway. There are some good ones, nevertheless... but even some of the better aggregators of 'market journalism' are littered with total fuckwit goofballs. See referenced Bloomberg article re: how European 'Austerity' is bad, because of fat retarded children getting less free medicines, and stuff.


Please to post comments

Comments are closed.