WI-SEN 2022 Megathread: Who stole my cheese?

[Xing]

I'm guessing Ron Kind or Mark Pocan runs, and they'd definitely be better candidates. Both would definitely start out as underdogs, though, and Democrats would probably need this to be an atypical midterm to have a real shot here. Anyone who knows me know I'm no fan of Johnson, but he won't be easy to beat at all in a Democratic midterm.

Also, man, I miss Feingold.

[Xing]

Yeah, denying money to working class families who desperately need it will totally be beneficial to "our children's future", while giving tax cuts to wealthy definitely totally helped reduce the national debt (which "Rojo" seemed so concerned about while Trump was President). How is arguing that there was election fraud without any evidence helping our children again?

Wisconsin, you could've had ten more years of Feingold at this point, but you chose this guy twice, instead. You done messed up, and knowing the timeline we're in, you probably will again in two years.

[Xing]

Pocan probably made the right choice. I think he’d be a great Senator, but the “Madison libruhl” attack would probably have been used relentlessly against him and would’ve at least been a bit effective.

[Xing]

Pocan probably made the right choice. I think he’d be a great Senator, but the “Madison libruhl” attack would probably have been used relentlessly against him and would’ve at least been a bit effective.

It's like you people like in a world where Tammy Baldwin doesn't exist.

I don't think this seat is winnable period though.

I’ve regularly said that Baldwin is underestimated, because she has proven herself to be a very good campaigner who has appeal outside of Madison and can create her own brand. If Pocan could end up doing that, great, but I don’t think that’s a given.

Then again, what do I know, I’m just a PINO.

[Xing]

I don’t really get why people think Baldwin is underrated. She’s never had to run in a R-leaning or even neutral environment and won by double digits because she faced one of the worst Republican candidates of the cycle in a massive D wave year. Obviously she could win if 2024 is another favorable year for the party (and I do expect her to outrun Biden/Harris by 1-2 or so), but I don’t see how she has more of a brand than someone like Tester or even Casey. She would have done worse than Stabenow had she faced a similarly credible Republican candidate.

Probably because she was considered highly vulnerable (even more than Tester!!!!), and while she might've won by somewhat less against a better opponent, I don't think we can say for sure that it would've been by less than Stabenow. Either way, a victory of that margin, especially while the gubernatorial race was so close and Wisconsin isn't known as a state with a lot of swayable voters. I don't think she needs a particularly favorable year to win, as I could see her winning while the Democrats narrowly lose Wisconsin. If the Democrats lose Wisconsin by 4-5%, then she probably loses, but that would probably mean Democrats are having a bad night overall.

Pocan probably made the right choice. I think he’d be a great Senator, but the “Madison libruhl” attack would probably have been used relentlessly against him and would’ve at least been a bit effective.

It's like you people like in a world where Tammy Baldwin doesn't exist.

I don't think this seat is winnable period though.

I’ve regularly said that Baldwin is underestimated, because she has proven herself to be a very good campaigner who has appeal outside of Madison and can create her own brand. If Pocan could end up doing that, great, but I don’t think that’s a given.

Then again, what do I know, I’m just a PINO.

I just don't understand the difference between Pocan's politics and "progressiveness" and hers.

Do I think he would underperform her? No. But ff so, only for one reason: election after election recently--e.g. Alex Morse and Jon Hoadley--has proven that attacks on gay men's sexuality are extremely potent.

Pocan is untested as a statewide candidate. Maybe he would have fared just fine against the typical Republican attacks, but my gut is that he'd have a hard time.

[Xing]

Looks like it’s going to be a landslide for Senator-elect Replace Ron Johnson, folks!

[Xing]

I'm guessing that he'll run again unless the environment actually does end up looking bad for Republicans. I actually don't think him running or not affects the margin/competitiveness of this race much at all. Either way, it's Lean R, and I'd guess around a 3-point win for the Republicans. While it's not impossible for Democrats to win this race, they pretty much need 2022 to be an "atypical midterm" for that to happen.

[Xing]

Wisconsin seems like a fairly intelligent state.  Why do they put up with this nut job?  Aren't the residents embarrassed by him?

Wisconsin is an extremely divided state where results pretty much come down to turnout. Johnson ran in favorable years for his party, which 2022 seems more likely than not to be.

[Xing]

What’s a “socialist”? Since Republicans have referred to Obama, Sanders, Pelosi, Biden, and others as “socialists”, I’m trying to figure out the common denominator, other than having (D) next to one’s name.

[Xing]

Lean R -> Lean R. I highly doubt there are hoards of Any Republican but Johnson > Any Democrat > Johnson voters, or vice versa. Wisconsin isn’t exactly a state where being perceived as a centrist makes you more “electable”, nor does being perceived as far left/right function as a vice.

[Xing]

why is Barnes so un-electable

Something something too far left (for a state that elected and re-elected Tammy Baldwin.)

[Xing]

Barnes is a Bernie Socialist
https://mobile.twitter.com/TheOtherMandela/status/1247995868898344960

Based FF!

[Xing]

Barnes is a Bernie Socialist
https://mobile.twitter.com/TheOtherMandela/status/1247995868898344960

Based FF!

You want socialism?

America could use more socialism, yeah.

[Xing]

Now all she has to do is say "Latinx" to get BRTD's anti-endorsement!

[Xing]

I honestly don’t think Johnson running again is a “gift” to Democrats. It’s not like “controversial” Republicans never win, and often they don’t do any worse than “moderate” Republicans.

[Xing]

God damn it.

[Xing]

While it frustrates me that Republicans aren't held to any kind of standard when it comes to decency (or being "extreme"), and when Democrats say stupid things, it's evidence that they can't be trusted, whereas when Republicans do it, they're intelligently engaging in 12.5D chess to "own" the libs/media/whatever, Johnson wouldn't do significantly worse or better than a different Republican. He'd definitely be in trouble, probably an underdog if this were a Republican midterm, but the environment is going to be enough to put him over the top even if his campaign isn't great.

[Xing]

I could honestly see Johnson winning by double digits.

Not going to happen in a state with a fairly solid Democratic floor. Best case scenario would be a slightly larger win than his 2010 performance, though that's simply because I see a fairly small range of possibilities here (anything outside of a 3-6 point win for Johnson would be pretty surprising.)

[Xing]

I could honestly see Johnson winning by double digits.

Not going to happen in a state with a fairly solid Democratic floor. Best case scenario would be a slightly larger win than his 2010 performance, though that's simply because I see a fairly small range of possibilities here (anything outside of a 3-6 point win for Johnson would be pretty surprising.)

What exactly is that floor ? Scott walker won by 6 to 7 in his 3 wins albeit with crushing margins from WOW.  Is it really that hard to see Wisconsin rurals say vote like Michigan rurals if Barnes fizzles out?

I fully expect Johnson to improve throughout rural Wisconsin, but he's definitely going to face some drop-off from his 2016 numbers in WOW, and will probably do a bit worse in Dane/Milwaukee as well. Unless turnout is anemic in both Madison and Milwaukee, it's hard to envision a double digit win.

[Xing]

Barnes is more than liberal, he is a radical left-wing socialist out of step with Wisconsin. He supports socialized medicine, which means the government in charge of health care and doctors. In every place that happens, you have waiting lists and rationing. In the United Kingdom, if a senior needs a HIP replacement, it takes 90 days. In Canada, it takes 200 days. The cost of socialized medicine that Barnes supports would be immense as the Urban Institute, a left leaning institute, scored it as costing $32 trillion in 10 years, $2.5 trillion in the first year. The total we raise from our income taxes is $1.5 trillion so Barnes' plan would require tripling taxes. Even if he believes he can do it with five points on the corporate rate, that doesn't even pass elementary schools math. Even if he believes that could be done by taxing the rich, if you took every person in America $1 million or more and took 100 % of their income, it would pay for 5 months of Barnes' socialized medicine plan. Under that plan, Barnes wants to put everyone who hasn't paid into Medicare on Medicare and that would bankrupt Medicare, would hurt seniors who paid into Medicare for their whole life and rely on it for their health care. And putting 200 million people on it, including illegal immigrants, could bankrupt Medicare.

Barnes voted against authorizing work-share programs, against amending Wisconsin's iron-ore mining regulations and against reducing state income taxes.

Barnes is weak on crime and law enforcement, in fact, the gubernatorial administration which Barnes is working for vetoed a bill that would have penalized cities and counties that defund police departments.

https://madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/tony-evers-vetoes-bill-that-would-have-penalized-cities-counties-that-defund-police-departments/article_30125a78-7312-53d1-9972-9b16e305d008.html

Barnes also introduced legislation to eliminate “monetary bail as a condition of release for a defendant charged with” a crime, no matter the severity of the crime. Yes, you read that correctly – a proposal to eliminate prosecutors’ ability to keep dangerous people in custody. This bill died in committee but came after current Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm supported similar views in his inaugural campaign. Those views came back to light last month after Chisholm set what he later called an “inappropriately low” bail amount ($1,000) in the case of Darrell Brooks, who allegedly killed six people in a Waukesha, WI Christmas parade rampage just weeks after a domestic violence arrest. If the Barnes bill passed in 2016, Brooks, along with many other criminals, would have been freely walking the streets of Wisconsin for the past 5 years.

https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2015/related/proposals/ab981

And he also held a fundraiser with Robert Creamer, a felon who pleaded guilty to bank fraud in 2005 and was sentenced to five months in prison. More recently, Creamer and others tied to Democracy Partners got caught on camera in 2016 talking about inciting violence at Trump events. It got so out of hand that they had to take a step back from helping Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

https://www.nrsc.org/press-releases/barnes-gang-of-radicals-and-a-felon-host-fundraiser-2021-11-16/

Unsurprising that Barnes is a puppet of the radical Defund the Police movement and is endorsed by movements advocating the abolition of ICE.

So you can put all the lipstick you want on a pig but it is still a pig.

The idea that somehow Barnes is "out of step" with Wisconsin but Ron Johnson is not is...

But you see, it's okay for Republicans to be lightyears to the right of the average voter because something something dangerous radical leftists triggered.

[Xing]

I could see this race ending up close (decent chance it's within 5%), but I have a hard time seeing Democrats getting those last few percentage points from 47% to 49/50% in this environment. Polls in Wisconsin may have been decent in 2018, but I know better than to get my hopes up for this race.

[Xing]

As someone who watched the 2016 race closely (and has the mental trauma to prove it), Johnson was not a “generic R” then. He has always been really far right and said some really absurd things. He might be hamming it up a bit more this time, but he’s never not been awful. Much as I’d like to see him lose, these sorts of statements aren’t going to be enough to make that happen.

[Xing]

I think Barnes has always been a clear favorite. I doubt he can win the general in a year like this, though I don’t think he’s a particularly bad candidate at all (and I think the margin will be relatively respectable), the environment is just too much of an obstacle to overcome.

[Xing]

I think Barnes has always been a clear favorite. I doubt he can win the general in a year like this, though I don’t think he’s a particularly bad candidate at all (and I think the margin will be relatively respectable), the environment is just too much of an obstacle to overcome.

I'm confused as to why people say this about Wisconsin. Johnson's approvals are horrific right now, and while WI leans redder than MI/PA, I don't see this as hard as many people think, especially post-Roe.

It won't be *easy* for Barnes, but I think Johnson is being incredibly overrated in this environment.

I hope you’re right, but even though Wisconsin is comparable to Michigan or Pennsylvania in terms of partisan lean, it tends to swing a great deal with the national environment. Also, while I despise Johnson, he’s generally good at campaigning, even with lackluster approvals, which doesn’t seem to be the case with Oz.

[Xing]

The takes about Barnes being “too far left” are silly and tiresome. Baldwin is solidly left-wing, and it’s not like Johnson is much of a moderate. Same story in several other swing states. If Barnes loses (which I’m assuming he will), it won’t be because Sanders endorsed him.