Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
geeeeeus that is horrible. I hope the woman (and i hope it was a woman) gets all the medical help needed
The trend away from Republicans in those countries is expected to continue because of demographics. They are getting more similar to their Milwaukee county suburban cousins. I think Evers won in Port Washington and it was fairly close in Mequon. Ozaukee county is probably only an election cycle away from being considered to be a purple county.
What are you talking about? Ron Johnson won a third Srnate term, Van Orden flipped WI-3 from blue to red, and the GOP kept large majorities in the state assembly and Senate. Sure it’s annoying that Evers eked out a victory, but Wisconsin certainly went Republican.
I stand by my comment about wishful posts not aging well.
I am about as Conservative as they come and certainly wished for the red wave.
It did not happen - you can point to examples across the state/country if it makes you "feel better" but face it - WI and country rejected lot of Republican messaging.
I don't like it but am honest enough to acknowledge it.
Reason: Accepting reality allows for frank dialogue as to how to improve future results.
WI will likely never go full on R or full on D as it is a true swing state. The post about gerrymandering being the reason for election outcome in WI is silly.
The crazy state I live in (OR) is heavily gerrymandered by D's. Ironically the R's won a new district that was laid out with goal of being a long time D district. It doesn't always work out as planned.
When a moderate voter thinks of the republican party what they see is a man shouting about marxist while wearing a red MAGA hat at a school board meeting.
Good luck in 2024 your going to need it.
You mean a dumb moderate voter who knows nothing about policy
WI will likely never go full on R or full on D as it is a true swing state. The post about gerrymandering being the reason for election outcome in WI is silly.
I don't presume to know anything about Oregon politics, you would be wise to assume you know very little about WI politics.
I live here, you don't. I've lived here all my life - 80 yrs. Wisconsin has never been so polarized - and gerrymandered to the point the Dems have zero power at the state level.
After the election and days before Evers took office four years ago, GOP legislature passed legislation removing powers Walker and previous governors had - because THEY DIDN'T WIN.
The only elections GOP recognize in this state are those they win.
Craig Gilbert, an esteemed and astute political writer, former DC bureau chief for Journal Sentinal, now at the Marquette Law School Lubar Center for Public Policy who has been following and dissecting WI politics closely for DECADES, writes this:
Quote:
Gilbert: How Wisconsin's redistricting guarantees a lopsided Republican legislature in a 50/50 state
Republicans will win 63 of the state’s 99 Assembly seats this fall (give or take a seat).
....for all practical purposes, these legislative races have already been decided.
they’ve been decided by the way that the state Assembly’s 99 districts have been drawn.
At the end of a high-stakes redistricting fight, Wisconsin’s highest court ruled a few weeks ago in favor of a legislative map passed by the Republican-controlled Legislature, the same legislature that owed its lopsided majorities to a gerrymandered map passed in 2011.
...the election is an afterthought.
Wisconsin has roughly equal numbers of Republican and Democratic voters statewide, and these contests reflected that.
Under that map, 61 of the 99 Assembly districts tilted toward the GOP in their makeup. But under the new map, 63 Assembly districts lean Republican, meaning if the Republican Assembly candidate wins each district in which Republican voters outnumber Democratic voters, the GOP will win 27 more seats than Democrats (63-36).
Democrats don’t have the faintest chance of winning control of either chamber under this map.
Wisconsin is a 50/50 state with almost no 50/50 legislative districts. It is a place where the two major parties trade victories for U.S. Senate, governor and president, yet one party has an unshakeable grip on the Legislature.
Read the entire link for how we got to this dismal place.
And....
ACTUALLY IT TURNED OUT WORSE. Because of gerrymandering, GOP legislature now holds 64 seats - one more than Gilbert predicted, although he did say 'give or take a seat' - and two seats short of a supermajority where GOP would have total control.
So, please don't presume to tell me and Craig Gilbert gerrymandering in Wisconsin is silly. It isn't.
Gerrymandering in Wisconsin is permanently disenfranchising.
With a GOP SC, there is zero chance of a fair map in this state - ever.
A 50/50 state, with a GOP control of the legislature 64/35. And, then, people wonder why people are mad.
Last edited by Ariadne22; 11-16-2022 at 10:50 PM..
I don't presume to know anything about Oregon politics, you would be wise to assume you know very little about WI politics.
I live here, you don't. I've lived here all my life - 80 yrs. Wisconsin has never been so polarized - and gerrymandered to the point the Dems have zero power.
After the election and days before Evers took office four years ago, GOP legislature passed legislation removing powers Walker and previous governors had - because THEY DIDN'T WIN.
The only elections GOP recognize in this state are those they win.
Craig Gilbert, an esteemed and astute political writer, former DC bureau chief for Journal Sentinal, now at the Marquette Law School Lubar Center for Public Policy who has been following and dissecting WI politics closely for DECADES, writes this:Read the entire link for how we got to this dismal place.
And....
ACTUALLY IT TURNED OUT WORSE. Because of gerrymandering, GOP legislature now holds 64 seats - one more than Gilbert predicted, although he did say 'give or take a seat' - and two seats short of a supermajority where GOP would have total control.
So, please don't presume to tell me and Craig Gilbert gerrymandering in Wisconsin is silly. It isn't.
Gerrymandering in Wisconsin is permanently disenfranchising.
With a GOP SC, there is zero chance of a fair map in this state - ever.
A 50/50 state, with a GOP control of the legislature 64/35. And, then, people wonder why people are mad.
Senate elections have nothing to do with gerrymandering. Ron Johnson won 3 consecutive six year terms there because he is the best Senator in the country and represents the state very well.
Senate elections have nothing to do with gerrymandering. Ron Johnson won 3 consecutive six year terms there because he is the best Senator in the country and represents the state very well.
Who was talking about the US Senate? I wasn't. This thread is about mid-terms, not a specific race.
Further, your response is irrelevant to my comment which addressed an OR poster's comment on WI gerrymandering being 'silly.'
Gerrymandering in WI at the statehouse level mid-terms (title of this thread, remember?) is not irrelevant or silly.
Further, as you well know, I addressed Johnson's win in an earlier post.
To repeat, this is the worst performance Johnson has had in this state, winning by a mere 1% of the vote, against a black candidate with a history of BLM rhetoric - and that after spending 50% more than Democrats .
Polls showed Johnson winning by 3%. Johnson barely squeaked through with 1% of the vote, after spending TWO MILLION DOLLARS MORE than Barnes.
So, no, Johnson didn't win b/c he's such a great Senator. He's made stupid remarks on Covid, Social Security and Medicare which would have sunk any other candidate.
Johnson won because he isn't black - and he spent $2 million more.
That said, I'm surprised Barnes did as well as he did, as the GOP dominated areas of WI are very racist. Which once again speaks to how weak Johnson was as a candidate. Barnes got plenty of votes which normally would have gone to Johnson.
Last edited by Ariadne22; 11-16-2022 at 10:49 PM..
I don't presume to know anything about Oregon politics, you would be wise to assume you know very little about WI politics.
I live here, you don't. I've lived here all my life - 80 yrs. Wisconsin has never been so polarized - and gerrymandered to the point the Dems have zero power at the state level.
After the election and days before Evers took office four years ago, GOP legislature passed legislation removing powers Walker and previous governors had - because THEY DIDN'T WIN.
The only elections GOP recognize in this state are those they win.
, an esteemed and astute political writer, former DC bureau chief for Journal Sentinal, now at the Marquette Law School Lubar Center for Public Policy who has been following and dissecting WI politics closely for DECADES, writes this:Read the entire link for how we got to this dismal place.
And....
ACTUALLY IT TURNED OUT WORSE. Because of gerrymandering, GOP legislature now holds 64 seats - one more than Gilbert predicted, although he did say 'give or take a seat' - and two seats short of a supermajority where GOP would have total control.
So, please don't presume to tell me and Craig Gilbert gerrymandering in Wisconsin is silly. It isn't.
Gerrymandering in Wisconsin is permanently disenfranchising.
With a GOP SC, there is zero chance of a fair map in this state - ever.
A 50/50 state, with a GOP control of the legislature 64/35. And, then, people wonder why people are mad.
You would be wise not to presume too much about posters. I lived in WI for 50 plus years and know the state and it's politics like the back of my hand. Gerrymandering affects WI no more nor less than any other state in the union. You just seem to not like certain outcomes - understandable. We all likely feel that at election time (win some- lose some)
My observation is that people who use the word "fair", are usually talking about a situation they do not like. If D's were winning elections I am sure you would be on here saying, "the people have spoken and system is fair."
Parties in power during a census do gerrymander to some degree. Sometimes it works in their favor. Sometimes it doesn't.
You would be wise not to presume too much about posters. I lived in WI for 50 plus years and know the state and it's politics like the back of my hand. Gerrymandering affects WI no more nor less than any other state in the union. You just seem to not like certain outcomes - understandable. We all likely feel that at election time (win some- lose some)
My observation is that people who use the word "fair", are usually talking about a situation they do not like. If D's were winning elections I am sure you would be on here saying, "the people have spoken and system is fair."
Parties in power during a census do gerrymander to some degree. Sometimes it works in their favor. Sometimes it doesn't.
Kidding, right?
A gerrymander which skews control 64/35 in a 50/50 state is far more than "some degree."
It is a power grab, plain and simple. Anyone with a brain can recogize it is NOT FAIR - for either side to have control all out of proportion to the actual vote.
And, no, if the situation was reversed and the GOP was disenfranchised, I would not say "the people have spoken and system is fair." The playing field should be level for both sides. Honest brokers need to fix this.
Gerrymandering is wrong - no matter whose side it favors. And in WI, at the state level, there will never be a "win some- lose some" - until there is a serious shift in demographics.
The GOP knows it can't win elections without skewing the vote. So, they pick their voters - instead of the voters picking them -
And, then, to put frosting on that cake defang the Democrat governor of powers they were perfectly happy to allow a GOP gov - with help from their good buddies the WI SC:
Who was talking about the US Senate? I wasn't. This thread is about mid-terms, not a specific race.
Further, your response is irrelevant to my comment which addressed an OR poster's comment on WI gerrymandering being 'silly.'
Gerrymandering in WI at the statehouse level mid-terms (title of this thread, remember?) is not irrelevant or silly.
Further, as you well know, I addressed Johnson's win in an earlier post.
To repeat, this is the worst performance Johnson has had in this state, winning by a mere 1% of the vote, against a black candidate with a history of BLM rhetoric - and that after spending 50% more than Democrats .
Polls showed Johnson winning by 3%. Johnson barely squeaked through with 1% of the vote, after spending TWO MILLION DOLLARS MORE than Barnes.
So, no, Johnson didn't win b/c he's such a great Senator. He's made stupid remarks on Covid, Social Security and Medicare which would have sunk any other candidate.
Johnson won because he isn't black - and he spent $2 million more.
That said, I'm surprised Barnes did as well as he did, as the GOP dominated areas of WI are very racist. Which once again speaks to how weak Johnson was as a candidate. Barnes got plenty of votes which normally would have gone to Johnson.
I understand your frustration -- there were elections that didn't go the way I wanted them too, also -- but Barnes ran virtually dead even with Biden's 2020 showing in Wisconsin. Painting half of the state of WI as racist because your guy lost is not a good look, at all.
Perhaps Barnes might have won if he hadn't declined Biden's offer to campaign for him (that's a difficult sentence for me to write, since I despise Biden, but it's still a legitimate hypothetical). Certainly, it's a path of least resistance to say he lost because of racism, though -- especially if you don't actually have to say that to anyone's face.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
