2022 Wisconsin Senate Race if Russ Feingold were the nominee
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 09:37:24 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Congressional Elections (Moderators: Brittain33, GeorgiaModerate, Gass3268, Virginiá, Gracile)
  2022 Wisconsin Senate Race if Russ Feingold were the nominee
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Poll
Question: What would the margin have been for the 2022 WI Senate Race if Russ Feingold were the Democratic nominee?
#1
>R+6%
 
#2
R+6% to R+4%
 
#3
R+4% to R+2%
 
#4
<R+2%
 
#5
<D+2%
 
#6
D+2% to D+4%
 
#7
D+4% to D+6%
 
#8
>D+6%
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 35

Author Topic: 2022 Wisconsin Senate Race if Russ Feingold were the nominee  (Read 1168 times)
WalterWhite
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,990
United States
Political Matrix
E: -9.35, S: -9.83

P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: May 18, 2023, 09:36:07 PM »

What the title asks
Logged
GM Team Member and Senator WB
weatherboy1102
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,622
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.61, S: -7.83

P
WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: May 18, 2023, 09:57:08 PM »

I think he would've done similarly to Barnes.
Logged
Zedonathin2020
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,262
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: May 18, 2023, 10:08:30 PM »

Is this assuming he won in 2016?
Logged
Xing
xingkerui
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,303
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.52, S: -3.91

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: May 18, 2023, 10:42:10 PM »

If he had won in 2016 and everything had turned out the same, he probably would’ve won by around the margin Evers did (Johnson probably wouldn’t have been his opponent.) If he had run despite losing in 2016, I think the race would’ve ended up similarly to how it actually did.
Logged
TML
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,400


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: May 18, 2023, 11:01:18 PM »

Feingold would have been dragged down by the fact that he's a retread/has-been.
Logged
WalterWhite
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,990
United States
Political Matrix
E: -9.35, S: -9.83

P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: May 19, 2023, 05:39:52 AM »


No, assume Ron Johnson is the incumbent.
Logged
They put it to a vote and they just kept lying
20RP12
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,235
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.29, S: -7.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: May 19, 2023, 06:34:59 AM »

Might've done slightly better than Barnes but I think Johnson would've still pulled it out. Could've been almost exactly 50-50 with Feingold.
Logged
JMT
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,104


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: May 19, 2023, 07:45:47 AM »

If Feingold was the incumbent, he probably would’ve won re-election. If he was Ron Johnson’s challenger, he probably would’ve narrowly lost (similar margin to Barnes).

As a side note: Russ Feingold probably would be in the Senate today had he run in 2012 for the open seat. I imagine Tammy Baldwin wouldn’t have run in that case, and I think Feingold would’ve defeated Tommy Thompson. Given that Feingold wanted to return to the Senate after his 2010 defeat, it’s somewhat odd he waited to run till 2016 instead of running in 2012.
Logged
Galeel
Oashigo
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 991
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: May 19, 2023, 10:46:35 AM »

Feingold probably would have won simply because national Democrats wouldn't have abandoned the race. Barnes nearly won even with that.
Logged
Vosem
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,622
United States


Political Matrix
E: 8.13, S: -6.09

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: May 19, 2023, 11:01:37 AM »

It would not have been a GOP pickup if there were a Democratic incumbent; the Republican nominee would've been someone significantly weaker than Ron Johnson, unfortunately.

If Johnson was the incumbent, and Feingold ran instead of Barnes in our world? I don't think it would've been any different.
Logged
Zedonathin2020
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,262
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: May 19, 2023, 12:54:24 PM »


No, assume Ron Johnson is the incumbent.


That would mean he won In 2016 no? Or did you mean a victory in 2010 as well?

If you mean the latter then he probably wins about the same as Evers, maybe slightly less.
Logged
S019
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,253
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -4.13, S: -1.39

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: May 19, 2023, 12:57:29 PM »

If Feingold won, it’s hard for me to not see Clinton win also, which means he would likely lose. He would’ve lost by a bit more than Barnes if he was the candidate this time.
Logged
WalterWhite
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,990
United States
Political Matrix
E: -9.35, S: -9.83

P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: May 19, 2023, 02:22:58 PM »

Quote from: GM Team Member WB
I think he would've done similarly to Barnes.

Quote from: Xing
If he had won in 2016 and everything had turned out the same, he probably would’ve won by around the margin Evers did (Johnson probably wouldn’t have been his opponent.) If he had run despite losing in 2016, I think the race would’ve ended up similarly to how it actually did.

Quote from: My Aim Is True
Might've done slightly better than Barnes but I think Johnson would've still pulled it out. Could've been almost exactly 50-50 with Feingold.

Quote from: JMT
If Feingold was the incumbent, he probably would’ve won re-election. If he was Ron Johnson’s challenger, he probably would’ve narrowly lost (similar margin to Barnes).

As a side note: Russ Feingold probably would be in the Senate today had he run in 2012 for the open seat. I imagine Tammy Baldwin wouldn’t have run in that case, and I think Feingold would’ve defeated Tommy Thompson. Given that Feingold wanted to return to the Senate after his 2010 defeat, it’s somewhat odd he waited to run till 2016 instead of running in 2012.

Quote from: JMT
If Feingold was the incumbent, he probably would’ve won re-election. If he was Ron Johnson’s challenger, he probably would’ve narrowly lost (similar margin to Barnes).

As a side note: Russ Feingold probably would be in the Senate today had he run in 2012 for the open seat. I imagine Tammy Baldwin wouldn’t have run in that case, and I think Feingold would’ve defeated Tommy Thompson. Given that Feingold wanted to return to the Senate after his 2010 defeat, it’s somewhat odd he waited to run till 2016 instead of running in 2012.

Quote from: Galeel
Feingold probably would have won simply because national Democrats wouldn't have abandoned the race. Barnes nearly won even with that.

Quote from: Vosem
It would not have been a GOP pickup if there were a Democratic incumbent; the Republican nominee would've been someone significantly weaker than Ron Johnson, unfortunately.

If Johnson was the incumbent, and Feingold ran instead of Barnes in our world? I don't think it would've been any different.

Feingold would have probably been a MUCH weaker candidate than Barnes because he was a two-time loser.
Logged
President Johnson
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,576
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -3.23, S: -4.70


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: May 19, 2023, 03:35:35 PM »

If he won in 2016, he'd narrowly win by one percent, perhaps a little more against a weaker challenger. If he challenged Johnson again, he would have lost by somewhat more than Barnes. While someone else might have unseated RoJo in 2022, Feingold wasn't the guy.
Logged
Mr. Smith
MormDem
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 33,072
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: May 19, 2023, 09:18:19 PM »

I voted on the basis of him winning 2016, in which case, he runs away with it.

If he actually tried again for the third time, I expect at least a 5-pt deficit.
Logged
Fuzzy Stands With His Friend, Chairman Sanchez
Fuzzy Bear
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,501
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: May 20, 2023, 07:00:05 AM »

Feingold is an incredibly overrated candidate.  He developed this "nice guy" rep in 1992 and won convincingly then, but he's backslidden since to the point where he's unelectable.  He was also a young newcomer in 1992; he's an old man (70) now.

A different type of Democrat could have beaten RoJo in 2022 but Feingold would not have been it.

Logged
WalterWhite
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,990
United States
Political Matrix
E: -9.35, S: -9.83

P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: May 20, 2023, 07:31:31 AM »

Sorry if I was unclear, but VOTE ON THE BASIS THAT FEINGOLD LOST BOTH 2010 AND 2016!
Logged
DaleCooper
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,849


P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: May 20, 2023, 01:40:17 PM »

He would've won. Whatever his faults as a candidate are, he's better than Barnes and that probably would've been enough to win by less than 2%. Not sure why anyone would think that there'd be all these Barnes voters switching over the Johnson purely because they're angry at Feingold for losing in the past. That doesn't make much sense to me.
Logged
Mr. Smith
MormDem
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 33,072
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: May 20, 2023, 01:50:35 PM »

He would've won. Whatever his faults as a candidate are, he's better than Barnes and that probably would've been enough to win by less than 2%. Not sure why anyone would think that there'd be all these Barnes voters switching over the Johnson purely because they're angry at Feingold for losing in the past. That doesn't make much sense to me.

He wouldn't generate enough turnout like Barnes did specifically because he's lost twice. Self-fulfilling prophecy in a way.
Logged
DaleCooper
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,849


P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: May 20, 2023, 02:01:40 PM »

He would've won. Whatever his faults as a candidate are, he's better than Barnes and that probably would've been enough to win by less than 2%. Not sure why anyone would think that there'd be all these Barnes voters switching over the Johnson purely because they're angry at Feingold for losing in the past. That doesn't make much sense to me.

He wouldn't generate enough turnout like Barnes did specifically because he's lost twice. Self-fulfilling prophecy in a way.

I don't know that I buy that. The race likely wouldn't have been written off the way it was with Barnes if Feingold had been the nominee, plus Evers' reelection would've driven turnout too. Although to be fair, Barnes probably would've won if the Democrats had known to take that race seriously in the first place. But I just don't see the reasoning behind the notion that all these voters would stay home because Feingold lost a couple times over the course of 12 years. It's not like he's run for the same House district and lost multiple times in a row.
Logged
Mr. Smith
MormDem
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 33,072
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: May 20, 2023, 03:25:23 PM »

He would've won. Whatever his faults as a candidate are, he's better than Barnes and that probably would've been enough to win by less than 2%. Not sure why anyone would think that there'd be all these Barnes voters switching over the Johnson purely because they're angry at Feingold for losing in the past. That doesn't make much sense to me.

He wouldn't generate enough turnout like Barnes did specifically because he's lost twice. Self-fulfilling prophecy in a way.

I don't know that I buy that. The race likely wouldn't have been written off the way it was with Barnes if Feingold had been the nominee, plus Evers' reelection would've driven turnout too. Although to be fair, Barnes probably would've won if the Democrats had known to take that race seriously in the first place. But I just don't see the reasoning behind the notion that all these voters would stay home because Feingold lost a couple times over the course of 12 years. It's not like he's run for the same House district and lost multiple times in a row.

What makes you think the race wouldn't get triaged again?
Logged
DaleCooper
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,849


P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: May 20, 2023, 03:28:47 PM »

He would've won. Whatever his faults as a candidate are, he's better than Barnes and that probably would've been enough to win by less than 2%. Not sure why anyone would think that there'd be all these Barnes voters switching over the Johnson purely because they're angry at Feingold for losing in the past. That doesn't make much sense to me.

He wouldn't generate enough turnout like Barnes did specifically because he's lost twice. Self-fulfilling prophecy in a way.

I don't know that I buy that. The race likely wouldn't have been written off the way it was with Barnes if Feingold had been the nominee, plus Evers' reelection would've driven turnout too. Although to be fair, Barnes probably would've won if the Democrats had known to take that race seriously in the first place. But I just don't see the reasoning behind the notion that all these voters would stay home because Feingold lost a couple times over the course of 12 years. It's not like he's run for the same House district and lost multiple times in a row.

What makes you think the race wouldn't get triaged again?


Because Feingold is a recognizable name that Democrats would probably think has support in ancestral Democratic parts of the state. They wouldn't pursue the race for the right reasons, but that strikes me as the way that Democratic strategists still think.
Logged
Fuzzy Stands With His Friend, Chairman Sanchez
Fuzzy Bear
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,501
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: May 21, 2023, 06:45:45 AM »

He would've won. Whatever his faults as a candidate are, he's better than Barnes and that probably would've been enough to win by less than 2%. Not sure why anyone would think that there'd be all these Barnes voters switching over the Johnson purely because they're angry at Feingold for losing in the past. That doesn't make much sense to me.

He would have lost for other reasons than Barnes.
Logged
Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers
olawakandi
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 87,766
Jamaica
Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: May 21, 2023, 06:55:15 AM »

Johnson barely held in because of IAN, we just won WI by +11 that proves that IAN had something to do with Vance whom only won by 5 and DeWine by 25 and Johnson whom won by 1 and EVERS win by 4 had something to do with it Baldwin will win
Logged
DaleCooper
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,849


P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: May 21, 2023, 12:23:34 PM »

He would've won. Whatever his faults as a candidate are, he's better than Barnes and that probably would've been enough to win by less than 2%. Not sure why anyone would think that there'd be all these Barnes voters switching over the Johnson purely because they're angry at Feingold for losing in the past. That doesn't make much sense to me.

He would have lost for other reasons than Barnes.

Maybe.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.054 seconds with 14 queries.