(Wisconsin) Walker's winning formula in a polarized state

[Lando Lincoln]

Walker's winning formula in a polarized state
By Craig Gilbert of the Journal Sentinel

No race for governor featured a deeper partisan divide than Wisconsin’s last week, according to exit polls conducted around the country.

And almost none featured a bigger gender gap.

Both fault lines were among the nine election keys we wrote about on the eve of Tuesday’s contest for governor.

How did those keys play out in GOP Gov. Scott Walker’s 6-point victory over Democrat Mary Burke?

Let’s revisit them one by one:

Independents. After Walker won independents by 14 points in 2010 and 9 in 2012, it was vital for Democrats to close the gap. They didn’t. Walker won these voters by 11 points Tuesday. It’s very hard to lose an election in Wisconsin when you’re winning independents by double digits. The last three winners for president and the last four for governor in Wisconsin have all won the independent vote.

Gender gap. The gender gap was bigger in this race than it was in Walker’s 2010 and 2012 victories, according to exit polling. Walker won men by his largest margin ever (21 points). He also lost women by his largest margin ever (9 points). Because Burke’s problem with men was much bigger than Walker’s problem with women, the gender gap helped boost Walker and sink Burke. The 15-point gap between Walker’s support from men (60%) and his support from women (45%) was as big as any we could find for any governor last Tuesday, with one exception: South Carolina, where GOP Gov. Nikki Haley got 65% of the male vote and 48% of the female vote.



More at link ----->  http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/news/282036481.html

[kevindavis007]

Basically if a candidate follows the same on a national level in 2016, I think we will do well..

[Fishrrman]

From the article:
[[ No race for governor featured a deeper partisan divide than Wisconsin’s last week, according to exit polls conducted around the country. ]]

Indeed.

Prior to the election, I'd been reading posts here from those who state that the only hope for the Republican party is to "expand their brand" to attract a larger share of the electorate. That meme is usually accompanied with the claim that "white votes are no longer enough" to win elections, that such a vote is a shrinking demographic.

Yet in the most "polarized" atmosphere of all, it was the deep divisions of partisanship that made such victory possible by creating a line that clearly defined the left from the right. Again, to recall Florence Reese' great lines from Harlan county in 1931, "which side are you on, which side are you on?"

Simply stated, a milquetoast Republican would have lost. If Walker had "moved to the center" to "attract votes" -- kind of like Scott Brown did in his [failed] attempt at re-election in Massachusetts -- he probably would have been defeated this time around.

Walker won because he became (channeling Barry Goldwater) "a choice", not an echo.

Can he be "the choice" in 2016?