after Long, expensive and watchable gamesWisconsin took part in the poll Tuesday and voted in the new state Supreme Court justice.
Susan Crawford, a Liberty County judge backed by Democrats in the United States, defeated Brad Schimel, a conservative candidate supported by the National Republican Party.
I explained that in a conversation with Vox’s daily newsletter today, I asked political journalist Christian Paz to break down the big race and its influence. That’s what he has to say. (Our conversations are for length and clear editing.)
So, tell me what’s going on in Wisconsin.
Wisconsin’s Supreme Court has a seat, and it was publicly made as one of the Democrats retired. (The state’s Supreme Court is technically nonpartisan, but “liberal” supported by Democrats and “conservative” Republicans.)
Currently, Democrats currently have an ideological majority in court, and Tuesday’s game is going to have a majority party majority for the foreseeable future. Tuesday night, it was soon apparently a Democrat.
For those living in Wisconsin, the opportunity to decide the ideological composition of a court is important. Nationwide, however, race becomes important for a few other reasons.
First, it is the first statewide race in swing state or indeed any state since Trump took office. Democrats were underperforming in swing states in the 2024 election, so the game was seen as a test of whether Democrats can still win the game.
Second, we are about 10 weeks away from Trump’s second term, so so far, this game has been seen as a referendum for the Trump administration.
Third, this game is also a referendum on Elon Musk’s strength and influence. He managed to play himself by spending money in Wisconsin Tens of millions of dollars To support Schimel and to find as many ways to provide people with money to follow the competition by testing the restrictions of campaign finance rules, including Giving voters one million dollars. He invested millions of dollars in canvassing and even went to Wisconsin to hold a rally.
Finally, this election gives us a new data point, trying to answer a long-standing question that political scientists struggle with: Are there two voters? Traditional views show that the answer to this question is yes, there are some lower tendency voters who only pick out in the presidential election, and then there are higher tendencies voters who are very politically oriented, they show up in every election, whether presidential, midterm or special.
But Donald Trump-inspired levels of political polarization and loyalty, some wonder if that still exists. Tuesday’s results help indicate that it is possible.
It’s a non-periodic race, so some political commentators believe the game is somewhat biased towards Democrats.
Last year, Kamala Harris performed well among voters who said they were watching the news closely, a classic high-leaning voter. Similarly, high-leaning voters tend to vote reliably in non-presidential elections, and the idea is that those Harris voters might help Crawford. It seems they did it.
There are other games this year and mid-next year. Will Wisconsin tell us about this?
We shouldn’t invest too much stock in one game.
That said, you could say that Susan Crawford’s victory makes some blue wave of next year look more likely.
For Democrats, there are some factors that make this a unique case, which makes it a bit difficult to draw broad conclusions.
As I mentioned, the fact that this is a non-cyclical election may help Democrats, and there is another unique factor that may also help. Elon Musk is not the only one to invest. The same goes for wealthy Democrats, and so do grassroots donors. This is partly because it’s the only big game. If you are a liberal donor or fundraiser, where else can you send money? That won’t be the case in the middle of next year.
In other words, Crawford’s victory is indeed traditional wisdom. The Political Society tells us that you can’t be an unpopular president, have an unpopular agenda, lead an unpopular party, and have a seat in such a statewide competition. Republicans really haven’t flipped this seat.
This failure may have some impact on the mid-year next year. These elections tend to be partial to political parties, and voters try to use them to check on the current government. If other games this year (such as the Virginia Governor’s Competition) swing like Wisconsin’s competition, the Democrats might decide that their best bet is to try riding anti-Trump, anti-Muske, anti-status anger for a mid-term victory.
The result is also a huge warning sign about Elon Musk’s power. Last year, many people laughed at his canvassing efforts on behalf of Republicans, as well as his funds from outside groups outside the party system to announce voters. Then Trump won, and his strategy suddenly looked good.
Wisconsin believes that the world’s wealthiest people can put money into politics to influence ideas, making voting basically a financial transaction, which will pay off.
