There was a special election today for Wisconsin State Senate seat 10. Far northwestern rural Wisconsin. Trump won this district by 17 points. It had been held by a Republican.
Today the Democrat won by about 10 points. That’s a flip of +27D.
And just to put it into deeper context than the specific of Clinton v Trump - in 2016 the seat itself went R+26, in 2012 it went R+19, in 2008 R+12, and 2004 R+18.
This is solid deep R base territory. Using the average of the last four elections for the seat this is a shift of D+29.
Interpret the significance going into midterms as you will. It could just be fluke representing the particular candidates and local factors. But dang.
Thank you suranyi for bringing this result to our attention.
That is interesting in that it dispels so many of the excuses for previous Republican losses. The Democrats didn’t outspend the GOP, in fact the Koch brothers and their ilk poured $130,000 into the race, while the Democrat received only $10,000[li]. Secondly the GOP candidate wasn’t a damaged Ray Moore type but a locally respected incumbent assemblyman. Mostly, I think it shows a message that Democrats can use to regain their reputation as the party of the common people.[/li][quote=Patty Schachtner]
“My message has always been be kind, be considerate and we need to help people when they’re down,” she said. “We just need to be kind to people who are less fortunate and just help.”
[/quote]
Focus on running decent candidates like this and it could be a big year for Democrats.
Those aren’t the total numbers as I haven’t found a complete breakdown of spending but the Washington Post does say the Republicans significantly outspent Democrats.
Decent Democratic candidates have been coming out of the woodwork pretty much everywhere. Very few Republicans will be unopposed seriously this November at any level.
It’s not just because of Trump, but because of what he represents, and what it means for us if it isn’t resisted and overcome.
Was the Republican an “old guard” type or a trumpie?
It looks like he’s probably more the former than the latter. He apparently supported Trump in the election (though that was true of most GOP politicians). His positions, as shown on this Ballotpedia site, don’t seem particularly Trumpist to me (no mention of the Wall, for example).
As described in this article from the Wisconsin State Journal on the election results:
And it should be noted that the winner was a pro gun local who enjoys hunting bears so she’s not exactly your typical Bernie Sandersesque Democrat.
There’s not too much that can be taken away from a special election for a state senate seat except that I really hope Democrats are learning that voting really matters. Waging a holy war against the DNC because of conspiracy theories or deleting the Uber app to protest the Muslim ban are pointless. Massive protests are fine but they’ve got to be followed up with actual votes at each election, not making sure you’re in love with the candidate and they tick every box on a 100 question purity test.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Bernie is pretty pro gun, as I recall.
Maybe not, but four of them in three states on the same day, all leaning heavily in the same direction - that would be a nontrivial data point even if we didn’t have the rest of this past year to look at and match it up with.
I’d say this fad is really catching on. Just a hunch.
Its been about +1000R over the past 10 years or so. We got a long way to go if we want to have control over state governments in time for the next census when we can redistrict.
Is it because more Dems are turning out to vote or are they getting more independent votes?