Precisely why one has to be so careful when looking to sell one's soul.

Is a statement from the Moore campaign forthcoming?

@Shannon: The Moore campaign had Mike Tate speak for them. The call was arranged by Gillian Morris, who is acting as the Moore campaign's spokesperson and press secretary.

Thanks Micheal. I got confused flipping between articles.

A PAC would have to be registered with the Government Accountability Board.

If you can't do better than "paradegate," vagabond, you've got serious problems. How much is this Harsdorf-sponsored fake primary costing our local economy?

Parade-gate, email-gate, Youtube-gate..... quite a few controversies in just a couple of months. If the Dems hadn't pushed the recall button and made a hasty decision on such a NEA/union rabid candidate, perhaps they could have strengthened their efforts to put through a more principled candidate in the next legislative election.

Seriously? Not being in a parade unit is all you've got? Here's one for ya: Harsdorf's felony level lies about Shelly Moore campaigning on school time? Class I felony if prosecuted and convited--6 months of jail time. How does that compare to missing a parade?

I wouldn't say that parade-gate or email-gate or youtube-gate are anywhere near as important or damaging as lying-gate, lockstep-gate, or avoidance-gate. Up next: Debate-gate.

Yes, I can see these are MAJOR, MAJOR issues to you, vagabond. At least you would like to make them so. The problem with your claim is that most people are not stupid. They know garbage and ridiculousness when they see it and hear it. All this chest-thumping on non-issues does is turn independents and moderate republicans away.

I can't believe that you are obtuse enough to miss the point.......her actions speak to her character. As for Ms Harsdorf being "lock-step" - LAUGHABLE!!! She voted with the party that she was elected by her constituents to represent! Lock-step seems to be more of a union adjective in any case. Forced dues (extortion) to buy political power.

vagabond -- you're over the top, which is the problem with the Republican Party these days. As soon as corporations get their money out of elections, then the unions can. By the way, union dues DO NOT go to campaigns (unlike corporate contributions). It's illegal. Corporations made sure of that.

Vagabond- ICYMI Harsdorf is now claiming she has nothing to do with the Republicans in St. Croix County. Unless you are railing against Harsdorf for breaking her commitment to her Republican friends in that instance, you have no ground to stand on re: Harsdorf doing what she was elected to do by standing with Republicans.

vagabond: "her actions speak to her character." I couldn't agree more. Shelly Moore's chosen profession, teaching, shows her to be interested in childrens' futures and the promise they hold for a better tomorrow. Harsdorf, on the other hand, wants to squeeze dry funding for the education system in this state along with undermine the care for our seniors and veterans. All for the benefit of her political and corporate masters. Stay classy Sheila. ;-)

Well said, Tammy!

Weix won't win, Jene. Not a chance. Too many moderate Republicans (you know, a/k/a the Republican Party's base!) and Independents reject this whole Weix fiasco. I'm one of those Independents, but have spoken with many others.

KTinWI- I have spoken with many of Sheila's former supporters who stopped supporting her *because* of these shenanigans. It was the final straw for many.

Jene -- I hear you! I'm one of those "outside special interests" who's been working my arse off in the recall. Funny, I live in Somerset and work in Hudson... Didn't know that qualified me as an "outside special interest." Maybe that's because I'm not a huge corporation!

I, too, have spoken with many former Sheila supporters who don't approve of this "fake" primary. It really is, for me anyway, about doing a job. For example - Dean Knudson. He and I will never agree on anything. I would never vote for him. However, he has answered every single one of my emails. He held those "town hall" meetings. He is out there doing his job. I wouldn't expect him to agree with me on much of anything, but he is civil in his correspondence to me.

Sheila needs to do some introspection. She's changed, and now Shelly Moore is within 5 points of her in the latest straw poll. When will she get the message?

I am really getting worried with these deep delving rebuplican watch dogs. What scandle are they going to unleash next? Over due book gate? Or parking meter fine gate? I can fully understand why republicans refuse to discuss any factual issues when they have such earth shattering and compelling stuff to drool over. I am sorry but this is getting pathetic.

Wouldn't be any cost if the phony recall elections had not been perpetrated by the unions. Recall elections have never been used for the purpose of changing duly elected officials because you don't like they way they vote on ONE issue. They are designed to remove someone from office for malfeasance in public office. Harsdorf did not commit malfeasance in public office. She voted her conscience in an attempt to balance WI's budget, which we are required by law to do. After 8 years of the Dems in control in Madison, running up bills we can't pay, something had to change. I'll bet for every call Harsdorf got yelling at her about Walker's Budget Bill, she got two calls from constituents telling her to stand firm. Your side isn't the only one she's heard from. So quit claiming she didn't listen to you. And knowing she would take heat, literally, from the Progressive Left, she voted for the bill. The time for change is at the next regular election, not running up recall tabs with taxpayer money that no municipality has, just because you lost and don't like the result.

Mrs. Right,

I’m not aware that the recall statute proscribes malfeasance as the only justifiable use of the recall. Would misfeasance or nonfeasance suffice?

You flatly state, "Recall elections have never been used for the purpose of changing duly elected officials because you don't like they way they vote on ONE issue." Sen. George Petak was recalled from the state senate in 1996 because of ONE issue: voting for a sales tax increase that affected Racine county (among other counties). He had the legal authority from the voters to make a tough call, and he did it. But, enough of his constituents judged that he was failing to represent them, so they recalled him before they had the chance to oust him in the next election cycle. The law worked as it was designed, just as it is today. ."

I was thinking the very same thing!

And if he wins then we all vote for him in the election and oust Sheila. Either way we win.

WW ~ I was all excited for this win-win scenario, but what if Weix makes Sheila look like a RINO?

Sorry, Tammy, I must have missed that gem! Priceless, I'm sure! Won't have any effect on moderate Republicans or Independents... Can't wait for tomorrow night!

Not if the Republican Party keeps turning its back on its moderate members and Independents. And that'll get worse for the Harsdorf campaign after the redistricting fiasco comes to light in the next week and a half.

If Weix wins, there will still be an election on the 9th. I am guessing that any reputable news organization (looking at you, Mike Foley) or group who would be hosting debates would still allow a write-in candidate to debate, since she's clearly invested in the race.

"According to Moore’s opponent" is one major red flag. And when you provide a link to the actual campaign finance documents (or at least a more specific reference so one could find EXACTLY where the proof is), I may take your "news" more seriously. We owe it to each other to at least vet such claims.

You lost me at "libs" Marcia. It's not about the float Marcia. It's not about name calling. None of this recall is about the minutia that you keep flinging out there to distract from Sheila's voting record. Maybe some day you and Sheila will get that.

And if you're touting Mr. Weix as a paragon of honesty, you are the loser.

Marcia- the GOP seems to forget that the state of Wisconsin has LAWS and an established process we all must follow. Duerkop seems to think that if they can somehow eke out a win, it's all over in District 10. I just feel the need to remind the GOP that we have laws that must be followed, and processes that must be followed, and that it is incorrect to assume that if the fakes win tomorrow, we're done. The dangerous power grab we need to stop is the one the GOP has been trying to execute.

Oh my! I forgot one very important fact!! It seems all of you have, too, be you a Moore supporter or a Moore basher. The election will still be held on August 9th NO MATTER WHAT because we also have an independent candidate running. Not surprised us average citizens forgot, but am floored Harsdorf's camp and the St. Croix Republicans didn't catch that tidbit.

Jene -- As far as I'm aware, the original candidate who filed as an Independent never completed the paperwork or submitted signatures, so he won't be on the ballot.

KTinWI- D'OH! You're right, wasn't looking at the current lineup. I'll own that information fail- the independent is NOT on the ballot. Sorry, folks. As you were.

Oh Really Marcia? It is Shelly Moore who is dishonest? I think not. You show me the evidence!
Isaac Weix is not an honest candidate! On MPR this morning he claimed that he was a Democrat because he got enough signatures to run in the primary.
http://tinyurl.com/64hymbc
Then why does his FaceBook page list the following: Party: REPUBLICAN! Do you really want to vote for someone who is so blatantly dishonest? http://tinyurl.com/6br8vnv Politicians routinely "stretch the truth" few are so totally dishonest as Isaac Weix.

That link has already been posted. I will direct you to the comment I left when it was posted earlier.

Who claimed there was no outside money for Moore? Just like Sheila has Americans for Prosperity, etc., Shelly has her supporters as well.

This is different from claiming that the recall petitions against Republican Senators were circulated by outside special interest groups AND that the protests were all out of state agitators. Of course, the recall petitions against Democrats were circulated by a firm in Colorado that was hired by the Republican party.

Here's the difference, Marcia: Shelly Moore never claimed not to be taking PAC money. Of course she has to -- she's a challenger in a very short campaign. Sheila Harsdorf is the only one who's constantly ranted about PAC money, and yet now -- after 23 years in elected office -- she's changed her tune. Hypocrisy! She's a 23-year incumbent. Why does she need PAC money??

Unions cannot contribute to campaigns. End of story. Show me where in her paperwork she's taken money from unions, and I'll take you seriously. I'm looking at her filings, give me a page number to back up these claims.

As opposed to Harsdorf's INSIDE special interest corporate money? Please. Harsdorf is the only one who always stated she'd never take PAC money.

Jene -- you're right. As I stated above, unions may not contribute to elections -- it's illegal. Only corporations can. They saw to that.

Yes. on June 6th, the Harsdorf campaign gave the St. Croix County Republicans $1,500. Lies lies lies from Garza and Harsdorf.

Sandy, er, Marcia... Remember when you ranted and raved awhile back upon learning that We Are Wisconsin was on a separate floor in the same building as the St. Croix County Dems office? Remember that? I do. Now you have the St. Croix Republican Party IN THE SAME OFFICE as the Harsdorf campaign, and our Senator didn't know about the robocalls and emails that went out?

The only candidate running with any kind of integrity right now is Shelly Moore. Weix lied on his filing paperwork and Sheila only works for her INSIDE special interests.

The facts are, Weix is being funded by the Republicans, and Harsdorf is funding the Republicans that are funding him. It's all laid out in the campaign finance forms filed with the GAB. Doesn't matter how you feel about what Weix is doing, the money trail is indisputable.

Funny I thought Weix was running for the same party that Sheila belongs too, and I wonder where his funding coming from? I have yet to here any facts from you to date.

Please explain something, the state records indicate about 36% of state workers are unionized. How can unions be running this when they constitue less than 16% of the total workforce? Have you thought that maybe the residents are the ones driving this? And do you realize that many of them are alienated moderate republicans who are embarassed and sick of your conservative absurd and hypocritical values. I was a republican and I voted with my feet as have many friends. The conservatives are only succeeding in tearing the party apart. Walker and his machine are just to out of touch to realize it.

What was Harsdorf's money for?

When you donate money to a campaign, you don't get to dictate how it is used. Sheila's campaign gave $1500 to The St. Croix Republicans in June, and the St. Croix Republicans have been spending money on all of these robo calls and using their computers to generate emails supporting Weix. We don't know yet how much money the St. Croix Republicans have spent on Weix, but we will when the next filing is due.

We don't have a candidate claiming she is unaffiliated with her party. You have two. If you would do me the favor of actually responding to the issues the article addresses, I may be willing to entertain a lengthy discussion about campaign finance, but not before.

Marcia -- Let me try to clarify this for you. Union dues cannot be used toward any candidate's election. Corporations, on the other hand, can contribute to a candidate's election.

Unions can use money VOLUNTARILY contributed by their members to form a PAC to support their causes. Corporations, of course, can also do that.

You need to stop trying to change the subject. I am being respectful, I am not making any untrue claims. I am prepared to back up my statements with information, not rhetoric. All I ask is you do the same.

And why did the Wisconsin Republican Party give him $750 in June?

Your earlier comment was: "KT and all other Moore lovers...Weix can run for anything he want's. Harsdorf had nothing to do with Weix running. Nothing to do with the robo calls. You have no facts! Facts are Moore is a person who only has to do what the union says. She has proven she has no problem with breaking rules of any kind."
Starting with the first claim you made: I agree.
Next claim-Harsdorf has nothing to do with Weix,
Next claim-Harsdorf had nothing to do with robo calls.

What a joke. Get some poor chronic election loser to run as a schill to test the waters for Sheila. What happens if he wins and everyone votes for him in protest. I know a few republicans that cant make the jump to moore but do want to unload Harsdorf. I wonder if the republicans actually thought this through?

Marcia, Are you a Marxist? Did you know that one of their dictums is "The Ends justify the Means" Seems like you are engaging in Marxist tactics here.

Clear something up for me if you will Marcia. I've been following politics for over three decades now, from local to presidential. I'm a bit unclear on what's meant by the term "protest candidate." You use it as if we all have a clear, shared understanding of what you, or what Mr. Weix, mean. What's the significance of "protest" candidate? When Weix announced, and when the state GOP justified the strategy, I took it to mean that the purpose of a "protest candidate" was to delay the general election by a month, giving Harsdorf four more weeks to effectively campaign against Moore. Does the term mean something different today? Does calling him a "protest candidate" somehow make the effort more noble?

I'll let you know more after the primary.

They will care when they see how many moderates and independents start voting Democratic.

That's why I put quote marks around Democrat. I wanted to get across in the headline that Republicans are actively helping a person running as a Democrat, but who really isn't a Democrat. I don't think it's slanted at all.

I had to remove a handful of comments because they were personal attacks on other users. Another I had to remove because it contained masked profanity. I'm not sure which comment was yours.

In a perfect world, everyone would use their real names, even you. I can't do much about that without stifling the forum. I can, however, enforce the part of the terms of use that prohibits masked profanity. In fact, enforcing that rule makes this a better forum for all involved. Wouldn't you agree?

I think the GOP has lost its way and isn't taking care of its moderate base.

Walker started with a budget that was forcasted to have a 120-130 million dollar surplus. Then he gave away 800 million in tax breaks creating a false crisis.