Greg Sargent’s Plum Line post today, on the meaning of Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker’s victory in Tuesday’s recall election, argues that this outcome suggests a future of marginalized labor and enough campaign spending nationwide to buy everyone in America a pony. With an Ivy League education.

Boots and grass-roots, says Sargent, were no match for funds.

Some commenters agreed. Some did not. But throughout the comments, a feeling came through, from both sides of the political spectrum, that this whole recall seemed . . . unseemly. The idea of recalling a duly elected governor over his policies alone — not over, say, criminality or incompetence — just seemed like what George Will called it a few days ago: a tantrum by the left. A do-over.

We here at the PostScript bunker are too edgy and paranoid to watch sports, but a sports-watching friend sent us a wad of analogy relating to the comment thread, and especially to the lefties who hated the result but slightly less than you’d expect.

Our sports friend said, “Let’s say you’re a football fan and you just watched your team get trounced in the Super Bowl. And you want to hate what happened, and hate the other guys, but in the back of your mind, you know something that makes it slightly easier to bear. You know that your team didn’t really deserve even to BE in the Super Bowl, since they benefited from some terrible calls by zebras earlier in the playoffs. So you just basically feel sick and unsatisfied and out of sorts, and you kick the cat.”

PostScript is assuming the cat is . . . a sports thing. Anyway, let’s say it means what chas131 suggested in the comments — that even to liberals, the recall idea didn’t sit well:

I think people voted anti-union and anti-recall. That’s all. When the Democrats win they can try and rebuild the state’s underfunded pension liabilities. Recalls scare me far more than Scott Walker.

GiveMeABreak77 agreed. The bigger fuss the Democrats made, the worse it looked:

Far too much hyperbole about disappearing rights and how Walker will bring about the end of civilization. It was a policy decision. Democrats will get their chance to change it at the next election, not a re-do of the last one.

And DOps thinks the unions’ big ol’ recall tantrum makes them look exactly as entitled as Walker portrayed them:

Maybe the union’s muscle-flexing to demonstrate the unchallengable power of its 10% over the interests of the 90% simply helped to prove Walker’s point.

Bernielatham combines our thread so far with Sargent’s central point about money taking over politics and comes to a startling conclusion: Who really won this election? The media, he says.

One of the deeply disturbing aspects here is the windfall going to media outlets carrying all these ads. The financial incentive for the companies who own such media outlets is to fight tenaciously for a continuation of the present situation.

Pickerap sees the doom predictions today as part of the same media interest in voter frenzy:

Most people in Wisconsin did not feel that bad policy was grounds for a recall. That was it. So this “Democrats better watch out” theme (it’s what all the corporate media pundits are always thoughtlessly chanting) is once again garbage. Sargent’s just carrying water for the Republicans.

And elcigaro1 thinks there’s another way that the media might have poked the fire for the sake of eyeballs and clicks:

What I really want to know is, who was doing the exit polling? All this nonsense about a really close race. Come on now. Was this just wishful thinking by the MSM?

Here in the bunker we are too edgy and paranoid for conspiracy theories, but we did also just notice that our mission — siphoning off the most interesting comments in the most-read stories of the day — keeps the bunker lights on and disco balls turning around here, whether the comments are insightful or inciting. So, mark our words: This is the biggest election ever, and the other guys just ran over your football team with their cars. And kicked your cat.