Now we have a couple of formal polls to test against. I took the raw percentages for the ten GOP big boy debate candidates, recalculated the percentages, and came up with the standings of those candidates in the more recent scientifically done polls. The polls are by Bloomberg and WMUR. The former is national, the latter pertains to New Hampshire, which will have a key early primary. Here is the relevant graphic:

We see verification of Trump being in the lead. His performance during the debate was liked by a large majority, and he is the leader of the pack, still by a large majority, by those subsequently polled. What appears to be a drop is more a factor of the difference between asking who won the debate vs. who one would vote for.

There is a big difference, though, in the back field. Bush and Walker were in the lower tier of the back field in people’s response to the debate, but are moving into a shared second place.

So, two things. First, Trump is still winning, and really is winning, the GOP race. Second, unscientific online polls seem in this case meaningful. The polls initially gave uncannily similar (not random) results, and the application of a more scientific methodology verifies them.

I quickly add this. This is not a prediction of who will win the GOP nomination, or who will win the election for President.

Nate Silver makes some excellent points about this question in this blog post. The bottom line is that polling at this stage, or even well into the primary process, does not predict either outcome very well. But I think Silver also misses an important point. These polls are not meaningless. If you view them as having only one function, predicting primary or general election outcomes, they are useless. But they do something else.

Polling at this stage in a presidential race is not about who is going to be President. Rather, such information is a good indicator of what people are thinking, how the politics are operating, how campaigns are doing, what issues are motivating people, and all that stuff. If you see polls early in the process this way, they are interesting. If you want to know who will be on the ballot in November (next November, not this November) or who will win, then … well, no.

Wisconsin’s controversial law that limited the rights of public sector unions and sparked recall elections was struck down on Friday by a Wisconsin judge.

Republican Governor Scott Walker, who survived a recall election earlier this year that stemmed from passage of the collective bargaining law, said after the ruling that he was confident the state would ultimately prevail in an appeal.

“Sadly a liberal activist judge in Dane County wants to go backwards and take away the lawmaking responsibilities of the legislature and the governor,” Walker said in a statement.

Yes, yes, we are all ensaddened, Governor Walker. But not by your stupid law being struck down.

In any event, the issue is now in the courts. We shall see what happens.

[the judge] ruled that eliminating collective bargaining rights for municipal employees including teachers violated the workers’ right to free speech, association and equal protection.

He also ruled that the law’s requirement that Milwaukee city workers make pension contributions violated a home-rule provision in the state constitution.

Several provisions “single out and encumber the rights of those employees who choose union membership and representation solely because of that association” in violation of their free speech and association rights, Colas found.

Struck down on several accounts because of flagrant violation of the US constitution and other considerations. Those damn liberal judges.

Walker’s big mistake: Not first (somehow) making it so Unions could not use Lawyers.

Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett is in the lead in that primary and will likely take it. He is the guy who was defeated by Walker in the previous election for governor, in 2010. The margin then was about 5%.

The two likely candidates, Barrett and Walker, seem to be tied in polls as to who will win. If you are interested in seeing Walker defeated, tomorrow would be a good time to donate to Barrett’s race (assuming he wins). His web site is here. If you are in Wisconsin, you are probably already involved or donating. And if you are not involved or donating, this would be a good time to ask yourself the fundamental question: “Why do I even exist if I am essentially useless?”

The fact that there is a recall underway is itself a great thing (though I think it would have been nice if the voters of Wisconsin had done the right thing to begin with!). But having the recall process actually lead to Walker being replaced would be a spectacular statement. This would only be the third time such a thing has happened in US history, and it would be a clear message to the teabaggers; “we think you are poopyfaces!” (or words to that effect).

What were the earlier recalls?

In 1921, Lynn Frazier was removed as Governor of North Dakota through the recall process over political issues. Frazier was a socialist and favored government ownership of banks and industry, so anti-socialist forces removed him. More recently, Gray Davis was removed by recall in California in 2003 by an effort initially funded by the wealthy Darrell Issa, a right-winger who wanted to be governer and thought this would be a good way to do it. Turns out Arnold Schwarzenegger took the job instead.

Related: Arizona Governor Evan Mecham was recalled in Arizona when the secretary of state certified a successful petition and an election was scheduled for May 17th, 1998. However, Mecham was impeached in February, a process that took a few months but resulted in his removal from office prior to the recall election. That was over misusing government funds.