Dallet Blows Off Burns’ Backing
High court candidate prefers not to be identified with left wing loser Tim Burns?
Rebecca Dallet. Photo courtesy of Dallet for Justice.
As far as Rebecca Dallet is concerned, the less said about Tim Burns the better. She has run like a scalded dog from her vanquished primary opponent.
Consider this: more than a week after the AP reported Burns’ endorsement of Dallet, there is no mention of it at her campaign website. Notably, however, what remains is a February 5 entry that reads, “Judges, Commissioner, DA endorse Rebecca Dallet…say Burns ‘Not Qualified’”. That entry is posted adjacent to news of U.S. Senator Tammy Baldwin’s endorsement and the primary election results.
Dallet’s release allowed that she was “flattered to receive the endorsement of so many”– nearly all of whom are supporters of Burns. Her campaign said the “endorsement of these Wisconsin leaders gives this campaign the momentum to win…”
But how much momentum can Dallet really expect from Burns supporters? While most Burns voters who turn out April 3 will migrate to Dallet, it’s clearly possible his supporters will not turn out in the same numbers as on February 20. Burns’ support skewed heavily to the left. A segment of that group might just sit out the general election.
The general election turnout likely will consist of more independents than voted on February 20. The winner will be determined by who fares best among these and other voters who did not participate February 20. Dallet clearly believes that among these voters the last thing she needs is to be known as the candidate of partisan left-winger Tim Burns.
I asked the Dallet campaign why it has not publicized the Burns endorsement. I did not receive a response.
The Contrarian
-
Parents May ‘Break Up’ MPS
Feb 8th, 2022 by George Mitchell
-
School Choice Key Issue in Governor Race
Sep 1st, 2021 by George Mitchell
-
Jill Underly Flunks School Choice 101
Feb 22nd, 2021 by George Mitchell
A mountain out of a molehill, I’m afraid. Burns’s supporters will likely prioritize making progressive inroads on the Supreme Court over spiting Dallet. And while the email in question urges folks to donate to Dallet, it’s kind of vague. If he’s standing on the campaign’s sidelines, I suspect it’s because he wants to be there, not because he’s been pushed aside.
Also, I’d hardly call it the height of good taste to compare a respected judge and statewide political candidate to a “scalded dog.”
George Mitchell is inventing a reaction that can only be designed to protect his conservative base — it has not basis in fact.
This is pretty desperate even for “the contrarian.” He continues to bring an element of right-wing blogs to UM.
“not (sic) basis in fact”?
“a reaction that can only be designed to protect his conservative base”?
Yes, George, since I have only found Screnok supporters trying to stir up an attack on Dallet by referencing the unhappiness of Burns supporters. Now some are indeed unhappy their guy didn’t push through, but most I’ve met have little problem picking Dallet over Screnok and are not unhappy with her quickness to support some of his backers who I know she liked in the past and had hoped to win to her side. Conservative base is also fair, since I have for other reasons been doing a deep dive into Milwaukee’s voucher program and find your tilt all over documents on that.
Yes, George. Of course there are extreme progressives unhappy Burns didn’t make it but really don’t see that many who think Dallet’s post-election attitude is an important factor. So I wonder why the biggest proponent of voucher schools, whose writings have come up in my research on the issue, should be writing anything like this unless he’s Screnok supporter?
I wish I could find out in how many criminal cases in where Justice Dallet simply waved the idea of tacking years on a felon carrying a fire arm. Liberals pretend to care about gun laws but in Milwaukee Courts liberal jugdes seem to always give felons a break. The truth is the NRA is for enforcing gun laws lefties like Dallet do not.
George Mitchell is a Bradley Foundation hack who sees Dallett winning the race right now. Which means it is his job to make up BS to try to help WMC/NRA puppet Screnock in any way he can.
Problem- I live in Madison, which would be the base of Burns’ support, and they all want to blast out these right-wing hacks screwing up our stats and country. Dallett will get those Burns votes, and likely the votes of those who didn’t vote in the primary.
Troll if Dallet did as you think she did, it will be an issue. Some dark money group will run ads using that against her. Why wouldn’t they? It panders so well to people like you. Not doing so would be a “waist of money,” as you say.
I counted the number of people Mitchel is talking about, who will sit out the election because Dallet is not promoting Burns endorsement.
Came up with 57.
It is noticeable that you failed to name the third candidate in the article. Dallet faced two opponents in the primary.As an independent voter she was clearly the impartial candidate as one might hope for in a Supreme Court judge. She has not changed nor has her remaining opponent. My hope is she will be elected to actually hear a case brought before the court and decide on its merits. We all know how her remaining opponent will rule on a case before it even reaches the Supreme Court and that is what we don’t want in a judge.
#10: What do think about Judge Dallet’s comment re “rule of law garbage”?
Hey Troll#8: How many criminal cases did the Wisconsin Supreme Court hear in the last two years? All this talk of lax on this lax on that is just smoke. The type of cases that they hear are on points of law.
#12: “Points of law,” Or. as Rebecca Dallet might say, the “rule of law garbage.”
Yes clearly that one comment means she is unfit for the bench. Get a grip. Talk about selective partisan outrage.
#9: The MU poll measures higher voter enthusiasm among Dems. If that translates to SCOWIS race then Dallet’s cold shoulder to Burns will not matter. Her left tilt in primary and current repositioning will have worked.
PMD: It was not a “comment.” It was a gaffe. It will be stamped on her forehead by April 3.
George Mitchell is, and has always been, a hack willing to sell his pelt to whomever (on the right) was paying. He adds nothing useful to UM’s usually good local commentary. Dump him.
George M what I think is Dallet is committed to justice in the court, your candidate (whose name you still fail to mention) is committed … , justice be damned. Dallet is impartial, whats his name is bought and paid for.
George M; what I think is Dallet is committed to justice in the court, your candidate(his name is still not mentioned) is committed…… justice be damned. Dallet is impartial, your candidate is bought and paid for.
MU Poll is flawed. It reminds me of those,samples of how voters voted as they walked from the polling booth. Liberal voters are ecstatic. Talking to media personnel. Conservatives see the media clown show and simply walks away. Franklin and his MU poll are the same way. Once the Conservative picks up their phone and hears some message from the Marquette kiddies. They simply hang up.
Of course a poll is flawed when you don’t like the result. At least Dallet pays lip service to being impartial. George has no problem with a candidate being bought and paid for by special interests.
If Screnock wins the court remains a 5 – 2 WMC tool. A Dallet win has the potential for a 4 – 3 WMC tool, but it’s just as likely a Dallet win forges a 4 – 1 – 2 WMC tool. Then the battle is for Abrahamson’s seat in 2019, but an Abrahamson win changes nothing, and an Abrahamson loss seals the court’s ideologocal makeup. The next game changing seat will be Kelly in 2020, but only if the 85 year old Abrahamson hangs on.
No formula here. I think Dallet has a 45 percent chance of winning. The Democrat recipe counts on a heavy minority and college student margin. Being a woman got Hillary to the finish line. More white women were brain washed and voted for Trump. Just too many wealthy white supremacists to overcome. Dallet loses by four points.