WI Senate 2018 - "Quietly Becoming the Top Senate Race of 2018"

[TheSaint250]

Duffy would be a strong candidate

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Duffy would be a strong candidate

Baldwin would wipe the floor with him (Duffy's an awful candidate who would be Akined pretty easily just going off stuff he's already said, I assumed he was self-aware enough to realize this when he initially said he wasn't running) and it'd create another highly competitive open house race...so I kinda hope he runs tbh.

[TJ in Oregon]

Duffy senses an opportunity to move from the House to the Senate. I believe many voters of Wisconsin do not support having a lesbian Senator.

why

He didn't write that. It says "Last Edit: Today at 11:59:52 am by Brittain33 " at the bottom, meaning he edited the post, and deleted posts that quoted the original post. The original post said "Senator with San Francisco values" or something. I don't think it was a reference to sexuality, he was likely referring to the fact that she's very liberal across the board, both socially and fiscally.

Anyway, back on topic (on Wisconsin's political tendencies regarding foreign policy).
2004 Senate:

Very clear west-east divide (with the Green Bay area and southeast corners also backing Feingold).

Question: Why did Obama do much better in rural Wisconsin in 2008 than he did in rural Michigan and Minnesota? Look at these:

Obama really swept almost the entire state, just about every rural county went for him.
Compare to:


Both of those (especially Minnesota) have large blobs of rural Republican territory. Does any really know why that's the case?

Wisconsin's east/west political divide has been around since the 1880s. It arose as a fault line between the largely German conservative Democrats in the eastern half of the state and the more progressive Republican Nordic and Scotch-Irish in the west. That divide largely held until WWI when Woodrow Wilson obliterated German support for the Democrats, leading the eastern half of the state to wildly swing between 1916 and 1920. Afterward, the Republican Party was embroiled in a brutal civil war between the Progressive and Stalwart factions of the Party. In the end, the progressive side became increasingly out of sync with the national Republican Party and bolted to the Democrats. That left the more conservative eastern half of the state as the rump conservative Republicans and more progressive Democrats in the western half. That is of course a very brief overview, but that's why there's traditionally such an east/west divide.

Of course it varies by year, and in good Republican years, the rural areas of the west can be split or even Republican, whereas in a Republican implosion like 2008 the Democrats can even win places like Jefferson County.

The Fox Valley is also something of an exception to the usual rules. It was traditionally Republican leaning back in the 1800s, likely related to its largely Belgian ancestry as opposed to German. It developed a little more like a rust belt industrial city but with some conservative Catholic elements. While 2008 is an exception, the Fox Valley generally leans right of center but is willing to vote for Democrats based on economics. In a post-Trumpian world, it looks like increasingly hostile terrain for the Dems, but if they pivot back to economics, they again would have a chance. Some similarities can also be seen with Sheboygan and Manitowoc, the latter of which was long a solidly Democratic County that has since flipped.

In Minnesota, some of the same settlement patterns are present but the geography is different. In Minnesota, the Republican rural areas are mostly either Great Plains-like areas in the SW or heavily German Catholic areas centered around Stearns County.

[mcmikk]

Not super relevant, but I figured we could use some more discussion about Wisconsin.

A recent internal poll for Kevin Nicholson found that he narrowly leads Leah Vukmir in the Republican primary, 30-23(albeit with many undecided). Roughly 60% of likely Republican primary voters have heard of Nicholson, of whom Nicholson holds a 40-5 favorable rating.

This doesn't truly mean too much as it stands right now, but could this race end up being one of many proxy wars between the Republican establishment and the Trumpist insurgents? If Nicholson wins the primary, I can't imagine things would turn out too well for him in the general. He is a Bannonite and "outsider" Trumpist in a state where Trump holds a 40-52 approval rating according to an October PPP poll. He could accelerate the trend of suburbs towards the Democrats, which is bad a in a state where the populous WOW suburbs are the main GOP base.

Baldwin is definitely favored regardless, but I'm thinking Vukmir would be a stronger general election candidate than Nicholson. Not smart to sacrifice the large suburbs for a comparatively smaller Trumpist base.

[Former Kentuckian]

Not super relevant, but I figured we could use some more discussion about Wisconsin.

A recent internal poll for Kevin Nicholson found that he narrowly leads Leah Vukmir in the Republican primary, 30-23(albeit with many undecided). Roughly 60% of likely Republican primary voters have heard of Nicholson, of whom Nicholson holds a 40-5 favorable rating.

This doesn't truly mean too much as it stands right now, but could this race end up being one of many proxy wars between the Republican establishment and the Trumpist insurgents? If Nicholson wins the primary, I can't imagine things would turn out too well for him in the general. He is a Bannonite and "outsider" Trumpist in a state where Trump holds a 40-52 approval rating according to an October PPP poll. He could accelerate the trend of suburbs towards the Democrats, which is bad a in a state where the populous WOW suburbs are the main GOP base.

Baldwin is definitely favored regardless, but I'm thinking Vukmir would be a stronger general election candidate than Nicholson. Not smart to sacrifice the large suburbs for a comparatively smaller Trumpist base.

For Baldwin's sake, I hope Nicholson is the nominee.

[mcmikk]

Not super relevant, but I figured we could use some more discussion about Wisconsin.

A recent internal poll for Kevin Nicholson found that he narrowly leads Leah Vukmir in the Republican primary, 30-23(albeit with many undecided). Roughly 60% of likely Republican primary voters have heard of Nicholson, of whom Nicholson holds a 40-5 favorable rating.

This doesn't truly mean too much as it stands right now, but could this race end up being one of many proxy wars between the Republican establishment and the Trumpist insurgents? If Nicholson wins the primary, I can't imagine things would turn out too well for him in the general. He is a Bannonite and "outsider" Trumpist in a state where Trump holds a 40-52 approval rating according to an October PPP poll. He could accelerate the trend of suburbs towards the Democrats, which is bad a in a state where the populous WOW suburbs are the main GOP base.

Baldwin is definitely favored regardless, but I'm thinking Vukmir would be a stronger general election candidate than Nicholson. Not smart to sacrifice the large suburbs for a comparatively smaller Trumpist base.

For Baldwin's sake, I hope Nicholson is the nominee.

[mcmikk]

Saw an interesting article by HuffPo chronicling the massive amount of outside spending against Tammy Baldwin, way more than any of her colleagues combined.

In order to take down the last surviving statewide, the GOP will first have to weather an ugly primary, where they successfully got the two candidates to sign a pledge to support the eventual nominee.

I'm still not thinking Baldwin is in much danger. This race is probably going to end up like KY SEN 2014. All this outside spending only reinforces the narrative that the GOP candidates are billionaire puppets while Baldwin is a fighter for Real Wisconsinites(TM). That said, Baldwin should start bringing out some more campaign ads and define the race early before the billionaires get to. While the Republicans are flinging mud in the primary, she should seize the opportunity to define herself and the GOP, perhaps walking a line of bringing a more populist message while still tying them to Trump(because of the enlightened suburbanites in WOW).

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

The GOP can't stand the fact a godless lesbian is in the united states senate. There's your answer.

[King Lear]

I rate this Lean Democratic, the only Republican that would have been a serious threat to Baldwin was Scott Walker, but with him seeking reelection, I believe she’ll hang on by a small margin.

[Young Conservative]

Nicholson isn’t a Bannonite. He’s a generic R that Bannon attached himself to.

[Virginiá]

I'm still not thinking Baldwin is in much danger. This race is probably going to end up like KY SEN 2014. All this outside spending only reinforces the narrative that the GOP candidates are billionaire puppets while Baldwin is a fighter for Real Wisconsinites(TM). That said, Baldwin should start bringing out some more campaign ads and define the race early before the billionaires get to. While the Republicans are flinging mud in the primary, she should seize the opportunity to define herself and the GOP, perhaps walking a line of bringing a more populist message while still tying them to Trump(because of the enlightened suburbanites in WOW).

Me either. There are very real limitations to what money can achieve in an election, at least in regards to advertising, and having a few billionaire sugar daddies does not by any means guarantee a win. I wouldn't be surprised if they dumped 15 million in ads in the final 4 months and barely move the needle.

[mcmikk]

I'm still not thinking Baldwin is in much danger. This race is probably going to end up like KY SEN 2014. All this outside spending only reinforces the narrative that the GOP candidates are billionaire puppets while Baldwin is a fighter for Real Wisconsinites(TM). That said, Baldwin should start bringing out some more campaign ads and define the race early before the billionaires get to. While the Republicans are flinging mud in the primary, she should seize the opportunity to define herself and the GOP, perhaps walking a line of bringing a more populist message while still tying them to Trump(because of the enlightened suburbanites in WOW).

Me either. There are very real limitations to what money can achieve in an election, at least in regards to advertising, and having a few billionaire sugar daddies does not by any means guarantee a win. I wouldn't be surprised if they dumped 15 million in ads in the final 4 months and barely move the needle.

This, precisely. Money can only do so much in a high-profile race. That said, it can be useful early to define the race when it isn't so high-profile. That's why I think it may be a good idea for Baldwin to start investing in advertising soon.

[Antonio the Sixth]

If the Kochs somehow manage to buy themselves another WI Senate seat in this environment, then American democracy is truly a sham.

[Dr. Arch]

If the Kochs somehow manage to buy themselves another WI Senate seat in this environment, then American democracy in WI is truly a sham.

FTFY

And then they wonder, "wai muh millehniuls leave 4 MN and IL? "

[mcmikk]

If the Kochs somehow manage to buy themselves another WI Senate seat in this environment, then American democracy in WI is truly a sham.

FTFY

And then they wonder, "wai muh millehniuls leave 4 MN and IL? "

Wisconsin is the 10th-most moved-out-of state, fun fact.

[Antonio the Sixth]

If the Kochs somehow manage to buy themselves another WI Senate seat in this environment, then American democracy in WI is truly a sham.

FTFY

And then they wonder, "wai muh millehniuls leave 4 MN and IL? "

Sadly, if the Koch model works in WI, I'm sure they'll waste no time exporting it to other States...

[Young Conservative]

If the Kochs somehow manage to buy themselves another WI Senate seat in this environment, then American democracy in WI is truly a sham.

FTFY

And then they wonder, "wai muh millehniuls leave 4 MN and IL? "

Wisconsin is the 10th-most moved-out-of state, fun fact.

Illinois is number 1. Deep Blue States comprise 5/10 most left states. 2 States are historically red states (Utah/Kansas). Two states are historic swing states (Ohio/WS). One state is a recent Republican state, but it has been a blue state for most of its history. (Kentucky)

[💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)]

If the Kochs somehow manage to buy themselves another WI Senate seat in this environment, then American democracy in WI is truly a sham.

FTFY

And then they wonder, "wai muh millehniuls leave 4 MN and IL? "

Wisconsin is the 10th-most moved-out-of state, fun fact.

Illinois is number 1. Deep Blue States comprise 5/10 most left states. 2 States are historically red states (Utah/Kansas). Two states are historic swing states (Ohio/WS). One state is a recent Republican state, but it has been a blue state for most of its history. (Kentucky)

Are you trying to draw a connection between Democratic control/voting and depopulation?

Illinois' population decline has accelerated under Rauner (i.e., when state government somehow ratcheted up from already astronomical dysfunction to cataclysmic dysfunction).

West Virginia's depopulation is due to economic factors and geographic constraints making job relocation there difficult. Additionally, West Virginia is the epicenter (and one of the first states to experience) of the opioid epidemic which further deter investment from outside forces. Finally, West Virginia has never been a swing state -- it moved from solid Democratic to one of the most solid Republican states at the federal level.

I've seen figures putting Utah in the top 10 for immigration. I expect that the Mormon population (missions, higher education, etc.) skews demographic statistics to the point that they are meaningless.

Post your figures because I can find lists that seem different from yours. I found one that includes states heavily reliant on resource extraction (Alaska, Wyoming, North Dakota) which are experiencing population shrinkage.

[mcmikk]

Baldwin was never in danger to begin with, but these election results only prove that Western Wisconsin is still a very swingy and elastic area as it has always been. Donald Trump did not flip it permanently to the GOP. It can still be won back by Baldwin in November, just like she did 6 years ago.

I know this screams "Atlas over-extrapolating hot take" but it's kinda true, and I wanted to revive this thread.

[Xing]

I mean, Baldwin will probably win, but Democrats should not be writing this off as safe just yet. They assumed Hillary and Feingold were sure to win, and we saw how well that worked out. I'm not of the school of thought that Wisconsin is the next Missouri and that it's becoming unwinnable for Democrats, but clearly they need to at least put some effort in to win.

[Dr. Arch]

I mean, Baldwin will probably win, but Democrats should not be writing this off as safe just yet. They assumed Hillary and Feingold were sure to win, and we saw how well that worked out. I'm not of the school of thought that Wisconsin is the next Missouri and that it's becoming unwinnable for Democrats, but clearly they need to at least put some effort in to win.

Baldwin is doing everything BUT laying back. As early as 2014, she was already laying down roots for her 2018 campaign.

[Badger]

In 2018, Baldwin's got this. Republicans need to shift money to other states starting now.

[Canis]

In 2018, Baldwin's got this. Republicans need to shift money to other states starting now.

True republicans priorities should be
Defending AZ
Missouri
Indiana
North Dakota
and Florida
Montana
West Virginia
Wisconsin is far less vulnerable than these

[mcmikk]

In 2018, Baldwin's got this. Republicans need to shift money to other states starting now.

True republicans priorities should be
Defending AZ
Missouri
Indiana
North Dakota
and Florida
Montana
West Virginia
Wisconsin is far less vulnerable than these

I know Arizona isn't quiiiiite a forgone conclusion just yet, but it's pretty forgone-adjacent. Essentially, the Republicans' path to holding onto their Senate majority is to pick up seats elsewhere. Wisconsin shouldn't be that first priority. If I were a Republican strategist, my priorities would be Missouri, Indiana, West Virginia, North Dakota, Arizona, Montana, Ohio, Florida, in that order. Wisconsin shouldn't even be on the list at all.

So fine, let the outsider billionaires waste their money on this race. If anything, all their spending is just going to reinforce Baldwin's message that the GOP is with the outsider special interests and she's with the people of Wisconsin. Can't wait for her to spank whichever crazy motherhubbard the GOP sends up against her.

[MT Treasurer]

Nice to see the Republicans getting their priorities straight...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/23/us/politics/wisconsin-senate-tammy-baldwin-kevin-nicholson.html