Democrats win another seat that was safely Republican - before Trump

Democrat Patty Schachtner won a special election for a state Senate seat in Wisconsin on Tuesday, scoring a huge upset victory for her party in a district that Failing Cheeto-Faced Ferret-Wearing Shit Gibbon handily captured just over a year ago.

It was the latest in a string of election victories for Democrats since Trump took office, and a sign of hope for the party that the energy from the base and frustration with the president could lead to more wins in November.

With every precinct counted, The Washington Post reported that Schachtner, the chief medical examiner for St. Croix County, won by 9 percentage points.

Republican Sheila Harsdorf had held the seat since 2001, but she left in November to become Republican Gov. Scott Walker’s agriculture secretary. In 2016, Harsdorf won re-election by 26 percentage points, and Trump beat Democratic rival Hillary Clinton by 17 points. Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney won the district in 2012.


“This campaign was about investing in people and revitalizing our area, whether that is making sure that every Wisconsinite has access to affordable health care, funding our public schools, technical colleges and UW campuses, or investing in good-paying jobs right here in Western Wisconsin,” Schachtner said in a statement. “Tonight, voters showed that they share those priorities, and I am deeply grateful for their support.”

Go Cheeseheads!

Where’s ya link?

That cop emoji is great! Why have I never seen that before?

eddie wrote:
Where’s ya link?

That cop emoji is great! Why have I never seen that before?

Obviously not paying close attention there, eddie...

I've used that smiley a few times on here..

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

eddie wrote:
Where’s ya link?

That cop emoji is great! Why have I never seen that before?

Obviously not paying close attention there, eddie...

I've used that     smiley a few times on here..

I like it! It makes me feel all superior.

eddie wrote:

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:


Obviously not paying close attention there, eddie...

I've used that     smiley a few times on here..

I like it! It makes me feel all superior.

It is a good mod tool. Sends a message.

November may bring a sad day for republicans. They better get everything they want done in the next year, because they probably lose the Senate. Then it's back to divided government which ain't bad. Legislation pretty much grinds to a halt.

Maddog wrote:November may bring a sad day for republicans.  They better get everything they want done in the next year, because they probably lose the Senate.  Then it's back to divided government which ain't bad.  Legislation pretty much grinds to a halt.  

I reckon they will also lose the House, what with all the resignations.  These are Republicans calculating their chances, and they ain't good.

Furthermore, nothing gets done in an election year.  The time is devoted to campaigning, and what's more, the candidates are afraid to make a move that could piss off voters.

If the House and Senate turn over, impeachment proceedings will start on the president.  Impeachment will have to be directed at Pence too, as he was head of the transition committee when Sally Yeats informed him that Flynn was working with the Russians. Pence did nothing, indicating he was involved in the conspiracy.

By then, Nancy Pelosi will be speaker, and she will move up to the presidency.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:November may bring a sad day for republicans.  They better get everything they want done in the next year, because they probably lose the Senate.  Then it's back to divided government which ain't bad.  Legislation pretty much grinds to a halt.  

I reckon they will also lose the House, what with all the resignations.  These are Republicans calculating their chances, and they ain't good.

Furthermore, nothing gets done in an election year.  The time is devoted to campaigning, and what's more, the candidates are afraid to make a move that could piss off voters.

If the House and Senate turn over, impeachment proceedings will start on the president.  Impeachment will have to be directed at Pence too, as he was head of the transition committee when Sally Yeats informed him that Flynn was working with the Russians.  Pence did nothing, indicating he was involved in the conspiracy.

By then, Nancy Pelosi will be speaker, and she will move up to the presidency.

You do have a vivid imagination. How will Pelosi be president if California leaves the union and is being led by Presidente Quill?

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I reckon they will also lose the House, what with all the resignations.  These are Republicans calculating their chances, and they ain't good.

Furthermore, nothing gets done in an election year.  The time is devoted to campaigning, and what's more, the candidates are afraid to make a move that could piss off voters.

If the House and Senate turn over, impeachment proceedings will start on the president.  Impeachment will have to be directed at Pence too, as he was head of the transition committee when Sally Yeats informed him that Flynn was working with the Russians.  Pence did nothing, indicating he was involved in the conspiracy.

By then, Nancy Pelosi will be speaker, and she will move up to the presidency.

You do have a vivid imagination.  How will Pelosi be president if California leaves the union and is being led by Presidente Quill?

California won't go if the above wish-list comes through. The primary motive for separation is the Republican Party. If they are kicked out, that will take all the wind out of the sails of the separatist movement.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

You do have a vivid imagination.  How will Pelosi be president if California leaves the union and is being led by Presidente Quill?

California won't go if the above wish-list comes through. The primary motive for separation is the Republican Party.  If they are kicked out, that will take all the wind out of the sails of the separatist movement.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Hey Ben, do you ever read the bullshit Quill posts? If so, how can you ban the Daily Wire with a straight face?

Maddog wrote:Hey Ben, do you ever read the bullshit Quill posts? If so, how can you ban the Daily Wire with a straight face?  

Ben: he was an abused child. Pay him no mind.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:Hey Ben, do you ever read the bullshit Quill posts? If so, how can you ban the Daily Wire with a straight face?  

 Ben: he was an abused child.  Pay him no mind.

Well, maybe I can move to the new country you are founding and get free mental care.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

 Ben: he was an abused child.  Pay him no mind.

Well, maybe I can move to the new country you are founding and get free mental care.

Umm...nah.  We are going to be quite selective.  We'll be administering redneck exclusion tests. After all, that's the whole point.

Maddog wrote:Hey Ben, do you ever read the bullshit Quill posts? If so, how can you ban the Daily Wire with a straight face?  

Okay, not to get into the squabble, but my only interest is in restricting sites that have proven they don't care about the truth. Every comment to a story is ... commentary, right? Commentary doesn't have to be factual (although I think it should be).

Ben Reilly wrote:

Maddog wrote:Hey Ben, do you ever read the bullshit Quill posts? If so, how can you ban the Daily Wire with a straight face?  

Okay, not to get into the squabble, but my only interest is in restricting sites that have proven they don't care about the truth. Every comment to a story is ... commentary, right? Commentary doesn't have to be factual (although I think it should be).

That's kind of twisted logic.

Do you want only facts or do you want people to be allowed to give their opinions?

Maddog wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:

Maddog wrote:Hey Ben, do you ever read the bullshit Quill posts? If so, how can you ban the Daily Wire with a straight face?  

Okay, not to get into the squabble, but my only interest is in restricting sites that have proven they don't care about the truth. Every comment to a story is ... commentary, right? Commentary doesn't have to be factual (although I think it should be).

That's kind of twisted logic.

Do you want only facts or do you want people to be allowed to give their opinions?

I'm posting something up about it right now.

Trust me, I've earned a profit for decades doing this in a private-sector industry that has been given zero government hand-outs and is in fact despised by the government. I'm your wet dream, dude.

Ben Reilly wrote:

Maddog wrote:

That's kind of twisted logic.

Do you want only facts or do you want people to be allowed to give their opinions?

I'm posting something up about it right now.

Trust me, I've earned a profit for decades doing this in a private-sector industry that has been given zero government hand-outs and is in fact despised by the government. I'm your wet dream, dude.

My wet dream can rock some high heels and a black cocktail dress.

Maddog wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:

Maddog wrote:

That's kind of twisted logic.

Do you want only facts or do you want people to be allowed to give their opinions?

I'm posting something up about it right now.

Trust me, I've earned a profit for decades doing this in a private-sector industry that has been given zero government hand-outs and is in fact despised by the government. I'm your wet dream, dude.

My wet dream can rock some high heels and a black cocktail dress.

Then it really depends on how you feel about long, sexy beards.

Ben Reilly wrote:

Maddog wrote:Hey Ben, do you ever read the bullshit Quill posts? If so, how can you ban the Daily Wire with a straight face?  

Okay, not to get into the squabble, but my only interest is in restricting sites that have proven they don't care about the truth. Every comment to a story is ... commentary, right? Commentary doesn't have to be factual (although I think it should be).

I don't know, Maddog. Here you're trying to censor creative ideas, whereas he's trying to rid the site of excess trash. Seems to me there's a vast difference.

You live under a redneck ceiling, a low threshold for different ideas. If you had your way, the earth would still be flat. That's as bad as tolerating the unsubstantiated ideas of alt.right invention.

News Flash !!!

Maddog states that "alt.right" is fake news !!!

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

News Flash  !!!

Maddog states that "alt.right"  is fake news  !!!

Correction to previous news flash :

Maddog stated that the suggestion of "alt.right" is fake news..

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

News Flash  !!!

Maddog states that "alt.right"  is fake news  !!!

Correction to previous news flash  :

Maddog stated that the suggestion of "alt.right" is fake news..

Correction to previous correction to former news flash :

It is rumoured that a mad dog suggested the existence of an "alt.right" was fake news..

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:


Correction to previous news flash  :

Maddog stated that the suggestion of "alt.right" is fake news..

Correction to previous correction to former news flash :

It is rumoured that a mad dog suggested the existence of an "alt.right" was fake news..

Legal Advice Caveat to Correction to Previous Corrections, et al :

Following recommendations from our corporate lawyers/grounds maintenance staff/tea ladies, it should be clarified that all and any rumours of mad dogs, alt.news and fake news are mostly hearsay, and furthermore it is company policy that all care is taken but no responsibility accepted, re the truth or otherwise behind the "facts" underlying said "news" reports..

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

News Flash  !!!

Maddog states that "alt.right"  is fake news  !!!

The alt right is not news, it's a political position like say Neocon.

Original Quill wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:

Okay, not to get into the squabble, but my only interest is in restricting sites that have proven they don't care about the truth. Every comment to a story is ... commentary, right? Commentary doesn't have to be factual (although I think it should be).

I don't know, Maddog.  Here you're trying to censor creative ideas, whereas he's trying to rid the site of excess trash.  Seems to me there's a vast difference.

You live under a redneck ceiling, a low threshold for different ideas.  If you had your way, the earth would still be flat.  That's as bad as tolerating the unsubstantiated ideas of alt.right invention.

I'm just trying to help Ben make sure members are only exposed to facts. You are one of the greatest spreaders of falsehoods and I'm just fulfilling my Amercan duty when I call you out.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I don't know, Maddog.  Here you're trying to censor creative ideas, whereas he's trying to rid the site of excess trash.  Seems to me there's a vast difference.

You live under a redneck ceiling, a low threshold for different ideas.  If you had your way, the earth would still be flat.  That's as bad as tolerating the unsubstantiated ideas of alt.right invention.

I'm just trying to help Ben make sure members are only exposed to facts.  You are one of the greatest spreaders of falsehoods and I'm just fulfilling my Amercan duty when I call you out.

Yet, you have no answers.  You play yipper dog and try to nip at the heels of those taller than you, but in the end, it's just yip, yip, yip.

You're not a systematic thinker, Red.  If you had a plan--even a perspective--you could contribute something.  But alas, you're just a disgruntled lap dog.

But talk about you is just as boring as talk about me.  Stop trying to tell others what to say, and get back to the topic.

Gov. Rick Walker told Republicans to 'wake up', after this latest Republican defeat:

The Hill wrote:Scott Walker warns GOP to ‘wake up’ after Dems flip deep-red Wisconsin district
BY REBECCA SAVRANSKY - 01/17/18 07:49 AM EST

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) warned Republicans to "wake up" after Democrats flipped a state Senate seat in a GOP-leaning district.

"Senate District 10 special election win by a Democrat is a wake up call for Republicans in Wisconsin," Walker tweeted.

"WAKE UP CALL: Can’t presume that voters know we are getting positive things done in Wisconsin. Help us share the good news."

Wisconsin?  Alabama?  Virginia?  New Jersey?  The writing on the wall is as clear as day. It looks to be a landslide in November.

The problem with the Republicans is they play at the fringes. But as soon as they get to center stage, they head straight to the pig trough. RW is for special interests; only the LW serves the general interest.

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:


Correction to previous correction to former news flash :

It is rumoured that a mad dog suggested the existence of an "alt.right" was fake news..

Legal Advice Caveat to Correction to Previous Corrections, et al :

Following recommendations from our corporate lawyers/grounds maintenance staff/tea ladies, it should be clarified that all and any rumours of mad dogs, alt.news and fake news are mostly hearsay, and furthermore it is company policy that all care is taken but no responsibility accepted, re the truth or otherwise behind the "facts" underlying said "news" reports..

Addendum:  Re:  Advice  Re:  Corrections...

After subsequent discussions with our most honourable comrade Union Delegates, it is furthermore decided that any and all spurious attempts to destabilise or disenfranchise or disavow, any responsible reporting from our most noble and fearless reporters, in respect to our dilligent reporting on matters pertaining to alt.news, fake news and "alternative facts" tomfoolery, it shall be regarded as a corporatist, fascist and/or statist conspiracy to deligitimise the truth of these assertions.  Viva le Revolucion  !

This has been a Public Service Announcement on behalf of The Barking Mad News Fixers Collective;
No further correspondence shall be entered into.

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:


Legal Advice Caveat to Correction to Previous Corrections, et al :

Following recommendations from our corporate lawyers/grounds maintenance staff/tea ladies, it should be clarified that all and any rumours of mad dogs, alt.news and fake news are mostly hearsay, and furthermore it is company policy that all care is taken but no responsibility accepted, re the truth or otherwise behind the "facts" underlying said "news" reports..

Addendum:  Re:  Advice  Re:  Corrections...

After subsequent discussions with our most honourable comrade Union Delegates, it is furthermore decided that any and all spurious attempts to destabilise or disenfranchise or disavow, any responsible reporting from our most noble and fearless reporters, in respect to our dilligent reporting on matters pertaining to alt.news, fake news and "alternative facts" tomfoolery, it shall be regarded as a corporatist, fascist and/or statist conspiracy to deligitimise the truth of these assertions.  Viva le Revolucion  !

This has been a Public Service Announcement on behalf of The Barking Mad News Fixers Collective;
No further correspondence shall be entered into.

Emergency Update re: Advices, re: Corrections, re: "Fake News" :

A weird, loopy mad dog entered my yard,  ate my notes, pissed up against the wall, and barked at the cat;   so that's the end of that fearless reporting...

So I had no choice but to shoot him  (The rabid dog, that is --  not the cat...

And then the cat pee'd on his mangy corpse.

Way past my bedtime now, anyways..

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

I'm just trying to help Ben make sure members are only exposed to facts.  You are one of the greatest spreaders of falsehoods and I'm just fulfilling my Amercan duty when I call you out.

Yet, you have no answers.  You play yipper dog and try to nip at the heels of those taller than you, but in the end, it's just yip, yip, yip.

You're not a systematic thinker, Red.  If you had a plan--even a perspective--you could contribute something.  But alas, you're just a disgruntled lap dog.

But talk about you is just as boring as talk about me.  Stop trying to tell others what to say, and get back to the topic.

Well, thankfully the world has you and your plans.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Yet, you have no answers.  You play yipper dog and try to nip at the heels of those taller than you, but in the end, it's just yip, yip, yip.

You're not a systematic thinker, Red.  If you had a plan--even a perspective--you could contribute something.  But alas, you're just a disgruntled lap dog.

But talk about you is just as boring as talk about me.  Stop trying to tell others what to say, and get back to the topic.

Well, thankfully the world has you and your plans.

Yip, yip, yip.

Anything else?

Guess not. That's what I mean, Red. Your not discussing, nor even arguing. You're just being belligerent.

Have you ever had an original thought, Red? You're very much like Trump...if you don't have someone to fight with, your cognition shuts down. Try some original ideas...if you can.