Liberals will win majority of the Wisconsin Supreme Court, CNN projects

Lionfish said:


Bill Mitchell

@mitchellvii
Subscribe


DON'T BLACK-PILL OVER THIS FOLKS:1. This was a liberal replacing a liberal.

Trump gets people to turn out no one else can.

Many things will positively affect the midterms between now and then that will be MUCH more important than this.


9:17 PM · Apr 1, 2025
·
208.7K
Views
Click to expand...

Trump turned out fewer voters in November than he did in his first election.
 
signalmankenneth said:
Musk money could not win this election this time?!!:)

CNN —
Democratic-backed candidate Susan Crawford will win Wisconsin’s Supreme Court race, CNN projects, maintaining the liberal majority on the court in a key battleground state less than three months into President Donald Trump’s second term.

Crawford, a liberal circuit court judge in Dane County, will beat the conservative candidate Brad Schimel, a Waukesha County judge who received Trump’s backing in the final stretch of the campaign. The race was officially nonpartisan, but Crawford’s victory will be seen as a bright spot for Democrats in Wisconsin and nationwide as voters handed the president’s preferred candidate a defeat in the first major political test of the second Trump era.

Crawford and her Democratic allies also worked to turn the election into a referendum on Trump ally Elon Musk, who poured millions of his personal fortune into the race. It quickly became the most expensive judicial contest in US history.

Musk and groups affiliated with him spent more than $19 million in the state, including funding field operations and television advertisements. Crawford tied the tech billionaire directly to Schimel in her appearances, at times referencing Musk at “my opponent.” Democratic groups ran television ads linking the Tesla CEO to Schimel.

In all, the candidates and outside groups spent more than $90 million — shattering spending records set just two years ago, when a liberal judge captured an open seat and flipped control of the court.

Schimel and Republicans had hoped to draw on the network of voters who supported Trump in November’s presidential election, when he narrowly won the battleground state. Schimel hugged Trump closely throughout the campaign and even appeared in a live chat with Musk on his social media site X.

But Democrats bet that seizing on that alignment would pay off with voters at a time when the two men have undertaken a controversial reshaping of the federal government. Issues such as abortion rights and the redistricting of congressional maps also emerged as flashpoints in the campaign.

Crawford, who has represented Planned Parenthood as a private attorney, backs abortion rights.

In a state with divided government — Gov. Tony Evers is a Democrat, and Republicans control the state legislature — the Supreme Court has become the final arbiter on policies that affect Wisconsites’ lives, including whether a 19th-century law that banned most abortions could be enforced today.

And in a state that helps determine who wins the presidency, the high court would have the final word in resolving election disputes.

Since the liberals won a 4-3 majority two years ago, the court has delivered major victories to Democrats — reversing a 2022 high court ruling that had imposed a near-total ban on ballot drop boxes and striking down state legislative maps drawn by Republicans.

The court could revisit congressional maps that have helped the GOP hold a lopsided advantage of six out of eight US House seats, despite the paper-thin margins of victory for Republicans and Democrats in statewide races.

Crawford will serve a 10-year term.(y)

https://www.cnn.com/2025/04/01/politics/wisconsin-supreme-court-election/index.html
Click to expand...
Big win in Wisconsin, but largely for Wisconsin. They prevented a GOP control of the Wisconsin Court

I wouldn’t weigh it too much for the 2026 elections. Notoriously, Trump cultists only show up for Trump, a special election when Trump isn’t at the top of the ticket is not going to bring them out. And at the same time, all the recent screw ups in the new Administration did mobilize the Democrats. Tough to determine how much those trends will play out two years from now
 
martin said:
You're replying to someone who doesn't follow politics apparently. Trump won Wisconsin in November.
Click to expand...
November was a Presidential cycle with Trump on the ballot.

This was an off-year election.

MUUUUUUUUUUCH more people vote in the first one than the second one.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
In the past, maybe, but not in the "Information Age". That's been true since the advent of television*. The advent of the Internet and, later, social media, only made money more important as seen by the rising costs of elections.

It costs money to flood the Internet and social media with ads, "testimonies" and set up websites.


*https://people.howstuffworks.com/cu...ture/advent-of-television-impact-politics.htm
Click to expand...
There is no "information age." The information has always been there. It is the Electronics Age. Electronics have allowed for that information to be organized and disseminated in an efficient manner. Television, the internet, and all the stuff on the internet are the result of electronics, not information.

Television, radio, computer networks, the telegraph, all work on electricity. The information they convey has always been there. These devices just allow for it to move around more efficiently where more people can access it.

Information age my ass.
 
gfm7175 said:
😮 Musk money 😮

:seenoevil: Soros money :seenoevil:Who were other major donors to Susan Crawford's campaign?
Click to expand...
“How much did George Soros donate to Susan Crawford's campaign?”
“Soros donated $2 million to the Democratic Party of Wisconsin”

“Who were other major donors to Susan Crawford's campaign”
“Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, also a billionaire, gave $1.5 million to the state Democratic Party for Crawford's campaign.”

“How much did Elon Musk donate to Brad Schimel?”
“Elon Musk spent more than $20 million on the Wisconsin Supreme Court race, split between donations to the state Republican Party and campaign efforts by his own political groups.”

www.jsonline.com

Who is George Soros, and how much did he donate to Susan Crawford's winning campaign?

George Soros and Elon Musk were both megadonors who funneled millions into the Wisconsin State Supreme Court race.
www.jsonline.com

Got anything more I can educate you on?
 
Lionfish said:


Bill Mitchell

@mitchellvii
Subscribe


DON'T BLACK-PILL OVER THIS FOLKS:1. This was a liberal replacing a liberal.
2. The 4-3 liberal court is still 4-3 as it has been for 2 years.
3. Trump gets people to turn out no one else can.
4. Schimel ain't Trump.
5. Voter ID won BIG which is huge.
6. 2026 is forever away in political time.
Many things will positively affect the midterms between now and then that will be MUCH more important than this.


9:17 PM · Apr 1, 2025
·
208.7K
Views
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, Mitchell doesn't fully understand because he doesn't live here.

Yes, I agree not to "black pill" over it. God is in control.
1) True, HOWEVER the state will now have an activist supreme court until AT LEAST 2028 (as the next two justices up for election are both conservatives).
2) True, HOWEVER see #1. Additionally, while it's been an activist court for 2 short years, it WAS a conservative-controlled court for MANY years prior (I want to say 15-ish or so? It's been quite a while).
3) Absolutely true!
4) Correct. Also, an off-year election isn't a Presidential election.
5) That it did. Idk if I'd say "HUUUUUGE", but yes it was a nice win for the fact that activists in black robes now can't simply declare it unconstitutional as it's now IN the constitution itself.
6) Midterms are not off-year "Spring elections".


The bad news is that Dems are now going to gerrymander WI maps like none-other. On the federal level, Dems will gain two house seats. At the state level, R's are going to lose even more legislative seats than they already have; maybe even losing the legislature itself. Hopefully not, but who knows.
 
archives said:
“How much did George Soros donate to Susan Crawford's campaign?”
“Soros donated $2 million to the Democratic Party of Wisconsin”

“Who were other major donors to Susan Crawford's campaign”
“Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, also a billionaire, gave $1.5 million to the state Democratic Party for Crawford's campaign.”

“How much did Elon Musk donate to Brad Schimel?”
“Elon Musk spent more than $20 million on the Wisconsin Supreme Court race, split between donations to the state Republican Party and campaign efforts by his own political groups.”

www.jsonline.com

Who is George Soros, and how much did he donate to Susan Crawford's winning campaign?

George Soros and Elon Musk were both megadonors who funneled millions into the Wisconsin State Supreme Court race.
www.jsonline.com

Got anything more I can educate you on?
Click to expand...
I don't care whose dick is bigger... Billionaires donating millions of dollars is still billionaires donating millions of dollars. You just hate Musk doing it because 1) You've been ORDERED to hate EVERYTHING that Musk says or does, and 2) the money was funding a conservative campaign rather than a libtard one.
 
The only possible reason anyone outside of WI would give two pinches of piss who's on the supreme court of that state is if the Dems are planning more election shenanigans in the future. Or of course if you need to kill your baby while travelling through or visiting. There is that important activity to protect.

I can understand why these losers are jumping up in the air and clicking their nuts though. After being so thoroughly drubbed any win, no matter how insignificant will make you feel important.
 
Last edited:
T. A. Gardner said:
There is no "information age." The information has always been there. It is the Electronics Age. Electronics have allowed for that information to be organized and disseminated in an efficient manner. Television, the internet, and all the stuff on the internet are the result of electronics, not information.

Television, radio, computer networks, the telegraph, all work on electricity. The information they convey has always been there. These devices just allow for it to move around more efficiently where more people can access it.

Information age my ass.
Click to expand...
"The Information Age is a historical period that began in the mid-20th century. It is characterized by a rapid shift from traditional industries, as established during the Industrial Revolution, to an economy centered on information technology. The onset of the Information Age has been linked to the development of the transistor in 1947, and the optical amplifier in 1957. These technological advances have had a significant impact on the way information is processed and transmitted." ( Wikipedia; there are numerous other sources.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top