Fred Wade should be proud of his endorsement by the Daily Cardinal. Despite being the oldest candidate in the 77th Assembly race, and lacking the student connections (from what I can perceive) that Dianne Hesselbein and Brett Hulsey have, Wade apparently impressed the board members with his arguments for protecting the UW system from budget cuts. Surprisingly, the board did not mention his stance on reforming the governor's veto, which I think validates Wade's concerns that the veto is an underreported issue.
Conversely, Wade was the one candidate who was not mentioned in the State Journal's endorsement of Brett Hulsey. According to the Wade campaign, after calling the State Journal, they discovered the paper had intentionally omitted Wade because he did not agree with them on a variety of issues, including spending cuts, the partial veto and merit selection of judges.
As I remarked this morning, many Madison liberals would regard an endorsement from the State Journal with extreme caution. The WSJ's ed board, which endorsed Bush in 2000 and 2004, and offered a stunningly superficial endorsement of Obama in 2008, often falls victim to campaign gimmicks and clichés. One liberal public official said the trick to winning the WSJ is to distract it with non-issues, such as cute puppies or the elimination of the secretary of state position.
Nevertheless, it's still probably good for Hulsey, if for no better reason than it gives him some more name recognition and free advertising space. The few Democratic primary voters who haven't made up their mind yet might consider the WSJ endorsement in the voting booth.
Dave Blaska endorses Scott Walker over Mark Neumann. I understand that alright. Blaska is a former government worker looking out for his own kind. However, I don't understand his comparison of the Milwaukee County Executive to Ronald Reagan. If Walker wants to spend like the Gipper, he better get some revisions ready for the state constitution.