Oct 18, 201309:00 AMBlaska's Bring It!
with David Blaska
Our Miss Burke was created in the la-bore-a-tory
(page 1 of 2)
Is Mary “I make no promises” Burke the shrink-wrapped candidate? Yes, and much less. The Democrat(ic) Party’s handpicked candidate for governor is the paint-by-numbers, cue-carded, pasteurized and polyunsaturated, gluten-free, focus-grouped candidate.
The liberal NetRoots rebellion against the handpicked choice of Democratic Party bosses may have leapt the firewall. Blue blogger Zach Wisniewski has stumbled across what the mainstream news media has missed. Mary Burke, their candidate for governor, is the non-nutrient product of focus groups.
Wisniewski’s source for his blog, entitled “Mary Burke: focus group tested, DPW approved!” is Kristin Hansen, the 5th Congressional District representative for the Democratic Party of Wisconsin. Wisniewski reproduces party insider Hansen’s Facebook posting:
... as for the “boo-hoo, no one asked ME who I want for governor [crowd]” — here’s the thing: there were 41 focus groups of “regular people” held across the state and you know what came out of it? That the toughest competition for Walker would be 1) a woman, 2) who is highly educated, 3) who has a business background and is literally a job creator, 4) who has deep roots in Wisconsin and 5) is not a sitting politician. That person is Mary Burke and she will be a great candidate.
Check, check, check, check, check. But what does she stand for?
Wisniewski comments: My take from reading is that we “regular people” who have concerns about Mary Burke’s candidacy should stop whining and crying and should just trust that the folks in the Democratic Party of Wisconsin leadership know what’s best when it comes to beating Scott Walker in 2014, because their focus groups told them how to win!
A Blogging Blue poster named Duane confirms the focus-group groping: “Our Jackson County Dems group underwent such a survey or opinion response in mid-summer. After expressing our choices, it was revealed that Mary Burke was a front-runner at that time although none of our group offered her name. It was also at that meeting that I heard Donald Driver mentioned, not by our group as a candidate.”
Lisa Mux, a Democratic activist in Waukesha, confirms: “As I recall, the focus groups to which Kristin refers were led by someone hired by a coalition of unions, not the DPW. The facilitator had asked to come to one of our Drinking Liberally Waukesha meetings, but we were already booked with speakers at the time.”
Our Miss Burke may be attractively packaged, but she does not seem to have any ingredients. This week, she issued a campaign message for the ages: “I make no promises.”
“GAH!!! Did she really say that?!” marveled one respondent at Blogging Blue. “Whomever is advising her really needs to get their fanny blistered. Weak roll out now becomes a subject of ridicule. Good god, Mike Tate. What the hell are you all thinking!?”
Bride of party boss Mike Tate
Russ Feingold’s Progressives United is drinking the Kool-Aid. It is asking whether it should jump on the Mary Burke bandwagon now. “Vote Today. ... Should we support Mary Burke now to get a head start on next year’s election?”
Another blog, BlueCheddar, remarks, “Wow. What’s ‘progressive’ about circling wagons around candidate Mary Burke to protect her from progressive Senator Kathleen Vinehout who is thinking of running in this gubernatorial race!?”
It continues: “Aside from that there is the important fact that Burke needs to shed the caucus convict Tanya Bjork from her campaign team before anybody — progressive or not — swears any allegiance. Having Bjork on the team flies in the face of Progressive United’s mission, which according to its own web site is to fight ‘corporate influence and corruption in all its forms.’”