Walker can “clean up County government” as a “different kind of politician” and still put political hacks into political positions - as this one clearly is. It’s the actual administrative positions - department heads and the like - that make the difference. Is he appointing qualified candidates or political cronies? Is he appointing someone to run transit or hhs who has experience or did he appoint a campaign worker like Bush did with FEMA a few years back? That’s where it matters.

Democrats and liberals appoint campaign officials to political positions in their administrations or offices ALL THE TIME and there isn’t much wrong with it - the job is political, after all. You don’t put a bean-counter in a political position where spin is the name of the game and you shouldn’t put a political hack like you into a professional position (which politicians of all stripes do anyway, which is merely one reason why I despise both parties).

Do you understand the distinction now?

Part of running a “clean” government is installing public servants who aren’t beholden to the person who got them the job - and in this case who got their boss the job - and will make the right decisions based on what’s best for the public they serve, not on if it will advance their bosses career.

You also seem to be confusing politically orientated jobs with politically appointed cronies as well as appointing “political hacks” vs. your campaign manager. There’s a difference, but in this case you’re just not willing to see it.

There are several politically-oriented jobs in the office of an elected official. This position - created with the approval of the County Board - is no different. There are liberal elected officials at all levels across America that appoint political hacks to political positions no differently from this. I’ve seen it so spare me your protests.

You’d have no complaint about it if a liberal replacement for Walker did this. Nor should you.

Pretend you can convince me otherwise.