The Government Accountability Board announced last month that 900,938 people officially signed in favor of the first gubernatorial recall in state history. For the Democratic Party, the question is: “Now what”?

After a year of concerted efforts, millions of dollars, one round of recall elections and a Wisconsin Supreme Court election, the Democrats finally have Gov. Scott Walker in their sights. Only one problem – who the hell is going to beat him?

The governor is already well-funded, has the infrastructure provided by the office and absolutely no primary threats. Couple that with the very high-profile endorsement of big-name Republican Rep. Paul Ryan of Janesville, and you have a formidable opponent.

The two front-runners for the Democratic nomination are Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett and former Dane County Executive Kathleen Falk. The key to the next month is going to be avoiding any negative campaigning between the two candidates like those that have affected the Republican presidential primaries. With the clear goal of removing Scott Walker from office, Democrats need to quickly coalesce behind one of the candidates.

Falk has the early advantage in endorsements from various public union groups due to the fact that she declared her candidacy earlier than Barrett did. In fact, Barrett’s late entry irked many Falk supporters. However, in a recent poll by Marquette Law School, Barrett leads Falk 36 percent to 29 percent for the nomination.

I think Barrett is the only logical candidate. Losing by only four points to Gov. Walker after a relatively weak campaign in 2010 and in one of the hardest elections for Democrats in recent memory, Barrett has the appropriate name recognition and strength of r?sum?. He is the more central candidate, and in this election, what is going to matter is convincing the independent voters left in the state that a change in governor is going to benefit them.

Everyone has been saying for several months that the voters have already aligned themselves on this issue. Vocal supporters on both sides know where they lie on the issue, and running a very liberal, Madison-connected candidate is not going to be of value.

Where Falk can only point to her concerted efforts in the recent recalls and promise to veto any state budget that doesn’t restore collective bargaining, Barrett can point to several tough budget decisions he has made as Milwaukee’s mayor.

What the Democrats need to provide is not someone who is as far to the left as Walker is to the right, but somebody who can demonstrate an ability to stand in the middle, recognize the budgetary problems facing the state and work with a divided State Assembly and Senate toward solving those problems.

I personally had hoped that a new quality candidate would have emerged such as Assembly Minority Leader Peter Barca, D-Kenosha, but ultimately a rerun of the 2010 governor race is the best option facing the Democratic Party. With the relatively narrow time frame for creating name recognition in their candidate, Barrett’s already established name in Milwaukee and the state at large are going to be valuable assets in this election.

As I have written before, the ideal scenario for Wisconsin would have been the opportunity to simply vote on a referendum geared around the specific issue of collective bargaining rights. Without that, the series of recall elections was understandably the only option. But it is going to be crucial for the success of this recall that the Democrats quickly recognize Barrett as the only candidate with a realistic chance of winning against an entrenched incumbent.

Now is not the time to push out a candidate with very left-leaning language. Those voters have already decided that regardless of the candidate, they are going to vote against Walker. The key to victory is going to be providing a candidate that people in the middle can see as a central, solutions-focused candidate who can move Wisconsin past the heated party schisms that have plagued the state since Walker took office.

John Waters ([email protected]) is a junior majoring in journalism.