In Wisconsin, a big win for liberals and a warning for the GOP

Take this for what you will…

In Wisconsin, a big win for liberals and a warning for the GOP

7.1k

Mike Bebernes

Mike Bebernes

·Senior Editor

Sun, April 9, 2023 at 8:45 AM CDT

“The 360” shows you diverse perspectives on the day’s top stories and debates.

How Wisconsin's new liberal supreme court could rule on abortion rights, redistricting

Scroll back up to restore default view.

What’s happening

On Tuesday night, while most of the political world was still focusing on the indictment of former President Donald Trump, a liberal candidate secured a major win that arguably suggests more about how future national elections may go than anything that happened in that New York City courtroom earlier in the day.

In Wisconsin, a liberal judge, Janet Protasiewicz, decisively defeated her conservative opponent, Daniel Kelly, and secured a seat on the state’s Supreme Court in a race widely considered to be the most important election of 2023. Protasiewicz’s victory will give liberals a majority on the Wisconsin court for the first time in 15 years. This potentially offers them the opportunity to strike down a 19th-century law banning nearly all abortions and to redraw congressional maps that have allowed Republicans to dominate the Wisconsin Legislature, despite the near 50-50 split of voters in the state.

Although the contest was nonpartisan on paper, it had all of the markings of a traditional campaign. Democrats and Republicans rallied intensely behind their preferred candidates, spending a combined $42 million on the race — nearly three times the previous record for any state Supreme Court election. Protasiewicz campaigned heavily on abortion and democracy reform, while Kelly attempted to portray her as “soft on crime.”

In another high-profile race Tuesday night in Chicago, the progressive candidate, Brandon Johnson, beat the conservative Democrat Paul Vallas in the race to become mayor of the nation’s third-largest city. These two victories come five months after Democrats overcame predictions of a “red wave” in last year’s midterm elections by winning key Senate, House and governors’ races across the country.

Why there’s debate

The Wisconsin Supreme Court will probably have a significant impact on politics in the state, but many political observers say it also serves as a strong bellwether of the political dynamics in the country ahead of next year’s critical presidential election cycle.

Commentators on both sides of the political spectrum say the result should be a flashing red warning light for Republicans about the dangers they face in 2024. They argue that Protasiewicz’s win shows that the dynamics that fueled the GOP’s lackluster showing in the midterms — most notably opposition to Trump and backlash to the Supreme Court’s ruling overturning abortion protections established in Roe v. Wade — are still swaying swing voters. Many also make the case that Republicans have little hope of pivoting away from such unpopular positions because of the intensely pro-Trump and anti-abortion views of the party’s core voters.

There are also practical implications of the new liberal majority on Wisconsin’s top court that could benefit Democrats. If the court throws out the state’s gerrymandered district map, which is strongly biased in the Republicans’ favor, that could help Democrats gain a handful of seats in the House of Representatives and tip the balance in the state Legislature in their favor. Some legal experts add that having Protasiewicz on the bench, rather than an ally of Trump, like Kelly, dramatically reduces the chances that a GOP-backed legal effort to challenge the state’s results in the next presidential election would be successful.

Other observers are wary of making too many predictions based on a single, off-year election, with more than 18 months to go before the presidential election. They argue that the types of voters who turn out for a state Supreme Court race don’t necessarily reflect the voters who will turn out next November, especially if Trump himself is on the ballot. It’s also possible, some add, that abortion may not be as potent an issue for Democrats in the future, because the question may largely have been settled in most states by the time voters head to the polls.

What’s next

Protasiewicz is scheduled to be sworn in in August, and the court is expected to quickly take up challenges to both the state’s centuries-old abortion ban and its gerrymandered district map. There has been some speculation that Republicans in the Wisconsin State Senate may attempt to impeach Protasiewicz to prevent her from tipping power in the court, but the party’s leaders have insisted that is not going to happen.

Perspectives

Republicans’ refusal to abandon unpopular positions means the losses will keep coming

“Republicans were, after all, warned. Again and again. On Trump and abortion, but also on guns, moral Grundyism, and their addiction to the crazy. Yet despite all the red blinking lights — and they are flashing everywhere — the GOP simply smacks its lips and says, ‘This is fine.’ More, please.” — Charlie Sykes, Bulwark

The GOP has time to stem its losses on abortion if it’s willing to moderate on the issue

“The Wisconsin results show abortion is still politically potent. … Republicans had better get their abortion position straight, and more in line with where voters are or they will face another disappointment in 2024. A total ban is a loser in swing states. Republicans who insist on that position could soon find that electoral defeats will lead to even more liberal state abortion laws than under Roe.” — Editorial, Wall Street Journal

An obscure, off-year court race can’t tell us much about how national elections will go

“The supreme-court election is a big win for the Left, but it would be foolish to suggest it means Wisconsin won’t be a competitive state in 2024. Turnout in 2023 was significantly higher than in a typical supreme-court election but significantly lower than in the November 2022 midterm elections or the 2020 presidential election.” — John McCormack, National Review

Democratic strength in Midwest swing states narrows the GOP’s path to the White House

“These gains in turn will further energize progressives and elect more Democrats in a virtuous circle. It is hard to imagine any Republican presidential candidate carrying Wisconsin in 2024, and that pattern is likely to hold in other key Midwestern states.” — Robert Kuttner, American Prospect

Unique circumstances made abortion more central in Wisconsin than it will be in most other contests

“The answer seems to be that abortion is a winning issue for Democrats, but only in some circumstances. When a campaign revolves around the subject — as the Wisconsin Supreme Court race did this week and voter referendums in Kansas, Kentucky and Michigan did last year — abortion can win big even in purple or red states. … But there is not yet evidence that abortion can determine the outcome of most political campaigns.” — David Leonhardt, New York Times

The GOP’s MAGA base is driving the party straight toward disaster in 2024

“The GOP nominee will have most likely endorsed a national abortion ban (or at least draconian abortion restrictions in their own state) to make the party’s primary voters happy. … If messaging about defending abortion rights and democracy commanded a sizable majority in this highly polarized, blue collar-heavy swing state, it may well continue constituting Kryptonite to MAGA — all the way through 2024.” — Greg Sargent, Washington Post

The messages that have helped the GOP win in the past may not work today

“Away from the Trump circus, it certainly feels like a shift is happening. The go-to Republican scare tactics – Socialism is coming! Crime is rampant! The family is under attack! – aren’t working. And when the face of your party becomes the first former president ever indicted, the old ‘party of law and order’ line falls a bit flat.” — Rex Huppke, USA Today

The result should inspire Democrats to proudly stand up for progressive policies

“For Democrats, there is a lesson here. When they run on protecting abortion rights, they tend to win. When they shy away from messages that are central to their party’s identity — for instance, by tacking to the center with tough-on-crime policies — their record is much more mixed. … In much of the country, voters don’t want Republican-lite candidates. They want Democrats who act like Democrats.” — Alex Shephard, New Republic

Abortion fights may be largely settled by the time the presidential election comes around

“Abortion might be legal in Wisconsin by the 2024 election. I think that’s actually quite likely. So, you know, abortion as a motivating issue might not be there for some voters.” — Amelia Thomson-DeVeaux, FiveThirtyEight

A liberal majority on Wisconsin’s court will counter the GOP’s efforts to subvert democracy

“A redrawn map could put two or three GOP-held seats in Congress in play for Democrats. … The actual winner of the 2024 Wisconsin presidential election will all but certainly receive the state’s electoral votes.” — Christina Cauterucci, Slate

As I see it, the message is: The major media in America is broken and totally one-sided. Fox News might be an exception(?), but only in the sense that, as far as I know, it’s one-sided in the other direction.

I don’t care much for either party. But it seems to me that if the GOP really wanted to defend itself, it would do a much better job at countering certain memes and misrepresentation of certain policies that get lots of criticism from the other side. For example:

  • The Supreme Court’s abortion ruling wasn’t about banning anything; it was about returning a Constitutional power to the states.

  • The meme “GOP = MAGA = evil incarnate” is a wild distortion.

  • DeSantis’s so-called “don’t say gay” policy wasn’t some kind of anti-gay pogrom, but rather, as even Wikipedia(!) admits, was about “prohibiting classroom instruction on sexual orientation or gender identity from kindergarten to grade 3 in Florida public school districts, or instruction on sexual orientation or gender identity in a manner that is not ‘age appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students’ in any grade, and . . . prohibiting schools from restricting parental access to their student’s education and health records” (Emphasis added). Doesn’t sound all that radical to me.

The GOP could do a much better job of countering those messages – not for the benefit of those who are already solidly in its camp, but for the benefit of Independents and swing voters.

2 Likes

I agree with you @FiatLux
The question is, Why isn’t GOP defending itself better?

2 Likes

When there is a “Uniparty” D’s and R’s behind a name mean little. The goal to implement the global agenda is what they have signed on to and took the off shore bank accounts in exchange.

4 Likes

Returning power to the states to do what?

This is the same silly rhetoric as “The civil war wasn’t about slavery”. Of course, people who actually study that subject professionally would tell you it was about more than slavery, but it’s not an easy case to make without boring the average listener to death, so therefore, a rhetorical trap.

Then we have just last week seen a Federal judge in Texas issue a ruling on aiming to suspend the FDA’s approval of abortion drug mifepristone.

…and if you think this is a tough debate now, just wait until photogenic white women in blue states start dying from backyard abortions, or having dreadful complications from miscarriage that would have been treated(with drugs like mifepristone) in red states.

I said this abortion stuff was going to bite Republicans before the mid terms, and I was correct. You can’t threaten to take away a right enjoyed by people for nearly 50 years and not expect to see significant backlash.

I don’t know if “enjoyed” is the right word but I totally agree with what you are saying. I always wondered why the Republicans didn’t advocate for just abortions would not be federally funded and then leave it to the states regarding their funds and their state laws. No, the republicans had to campaign no abortions period knowing there would be back lash which I assume they wanted the back lash.

1 Like

@ou812

The power to decide what the abortion law in the state will be. Pretty simple.

In legal terms, a power not enumerated in the Constitution and therefore “reserved to the states or the people.” Unless I missed something, any state can allow abortion if it so chooses.

You’ll note that I wasn’t expressing my personal opinion about whether abortion should be legal or not.

Fair call, I should have chosen a better word,…maybe exercised.

It’s amazing to me how many people who think government has no right to tell you to wear a mask or enact quarantine (as seen in 18thg century America or the Bible) are perfectly happy to have it stick its nose into the uteri of its citizens.

@ou812 No, my point is political. The pubs (politicians) wanted backlash. . I’m not advocating for abortion. I’m just saying how the political arena is exercised.

1 Like

I’ve made my views pretty clear elsewhere, but my first post in this thread is also all about the politics, not my personal philosophy on the issue.

deep-red states such as Kansas and Kentucky have soundly rejected attempts to strip away protections for abortion rights that are enshrined in their state constitutions.
the state role in interfering in the bodily autonomy of pregnant women is limited.

from a essay about the Handmaidens Tale
“Just as women in Gilead have become property of the
state as child-bearing machines, the children they produce are commodified.
In Tale, bearing a child insures the handmaid’s survival, while handmaids
who fail to produce progeny after three postings are exiled to the toxic waste
colonies. Because of their enhanced value, pregnant handmaids flaunt their
status. But they lose all rights to the infants after parturition: the babies
become the property of the Commanders’ wives. However, as a result of
environmental pollution, many babies are born deformed and thus fail to
actualize their commodity value: they are “Shredders” rather than “Keepers.””

Stein, Karen F. “Margaret Atwood’s Modest Proposal: The Handmaid’s Tale.” Canadian Literature, vol. 148,
1994, pp. 57-73.
Available at: https://canlit.ca/article/margaret-atwoods-modest-proposal/

1 Like

I read her book before I found out there was a series too. Quite popular evidently for lovers of dystopian life.

1 Like

written in 1985 (!), the reason Gilead mandates control over reproduction is because environmental toxicity, inorganic farming, and biowarfare experiments gone awry have destroyed fertility. God blesses the handmaidens because of their obedience to green initiatives.

That would make good copy for the world religion advocated by globalization. Remove all sacredness and leave the obedience and service to duty stuff.