1 00:00:01,368 --> 00:00:03,036 >> Days before the Democratic primary for 2 00:00:03,103 --> 00:00:06,106 governor, it seems like two camps have finally emerged. 3 00:00:06,173 --> 00:00:09,710 Why is the establishment more united now and is it 4 00:00:09,776 --> 00:00:13,680 too little, too late? This is inside Wisconsin 5 00:00:13,747 --> 00:00:15,415 politics. 6 00:00:17,017 --> 00:00:20,354 I'm Shawn Johnson here with my colleagues 7 00:00:20,420 --> 00:00:22,256 Anya van Wagtendonk Zac Schultz and Rich Kremer in 8 00:00:22,322 --> 00:00:23,957 Eau Claire. Hey, everyone. >> Hello. 9 00:00:24,024 --> 00:00:26,660 >> Hey. >> So it seems like just a 10 00:00:26,727 --> 00:00:30,297 few weeks ago on this show, we were all kind of 11 00:00:30,364 --> 00:00:33,100 wondering where all these candidates in this big 12 00:00:33,166 --> 00:00:37,571 primary fit, what were their political lanes? It 13 00:00:37,638 --> 00:00:40,841 seems like the mainstream frontrunner at that point 14 00:00:40,908 --> 00:00:44,778 was less clear. Zac, why is it sort of coming into 15 00:00:44,845 --> 00:00:47,614 focus now and is there enough time? 16 00:00:47,681 --> 00:00:50,684 >> Well, I think you have to look at this primary in 17 00:00:50,751 --> 00:00:53,353 the context of the national political mood for primary 18 00:00:53,420 --> 00:00:55,756 voters, which are Democrats that are mainly angry at 19 00:00:55,822 --> 00:00:58,058 Donald Trump and his administration there. If 20 00:00:58,125 --> 00:01:00,694 you look at it in that frame, the establishment's 21 00:01:00,761 --> 00:01:02,796 the bad guy. The establishment is national 22 00:01:02,863 --> 00:01:05,199 Democrats who haven't done enough to stand up to Trump. 23 00:01:05,265 --> 00:01:07,301 So tapping into those voters meant you couldn't 24 00:01:07,367 --> 00:01:09,169 be the establishment because then you were on 25 00:01:09,236 --> 00:01:12,439 the side of inertia. So Francesca Hong clearly 26 00:01:12,506 --> 00:01:14,808 moved to the left. She was going to fight, fight, 27 00:01:14,875 --> 00:01:16,944 fight. And a lot of the other Democrats in this 28 00:01:17,010 --> 00:01:19,646 race were trying to outflank her, and they just 29 00:01:19,713 --> 00:01:22,015 could not. Even as late as a few weeks ago, David 30 00:01:22,082 --> 00:01:24,718 Crowley was not happy to be called the establishment. 31 00:01:24,785 --> 00:01:26,920 Mandela Barnes denied that there was any lane that he 32 00:01:26,987 --> 00:01:29,923 could be put into before he dropped out of the race. No 33 00:01:29,990 --> 00:01:33,694 one wanted to be pinned as establishment, because that 34 00:01:33,760 --> 00:01:36,163 to the voters that were upset and wanted change 35 00:01:36,230 --> 00:01:39,466 that looked like more of the same. And so it is a 36 00:01:39,533 --> 00:01:42,202 little too late in the sense that if there's a lot 37 00:01:42,269 --> 00:01:45,072 of votes that have already been cast, but it is now 38 00:01:45,138 --> 00:01:47,307 clearly going that there has to be a centralized 39 00:01:47,374 --> 00:01:49,209 candidate of establishment power if they want to 40 00:01:49,276 --> 00:01:51,278 challenge the lane that Francesca Hong has already 41 00:01:51,345 --> 00:01:53,347 solidified for herself. >> And Ana. You've covered 42 00:01:53,413 --> 00:01:55,382 David Crowley. I mean, it seems like he still doesn't 43 00:01:55,449 --> 00:01:58,585 want that establishment label for a variety of 44 00:01:58,652 --> 00:02:01,121 reasons. Why is that? >> Yeah, I mean, part of it 45 00:02:01,188 --> 00:02:03,991 is what Zac just described is that there's really a 46 00:02:04,057 --> 00:02:06,827 lot of anger towards the establishment for, I think 47 00:02:06,894 --> 00:02:10,097 what Democrats feel or some Democrats feel has been 48 00:02:10,163 --> 00:02:13,033 inertia and sort of not enough of a of a fight and 49 00:02:13,100 --> 00:02:15,169 not wanting the status quo. But also David Crowley has 50 00:02:15,235 --> 00:02:18,038 a particularly kind of interesting personal 51 00:02:18,105 --> 00:02:21,241 backstory. He comes from a really sort of impoverished, 52 00:02:21,308 --> 00:02:24,478 challenged background in Milwaukee. And so up until, 53 00:02:24,545 --> 00:02:27,147 you know, he dropped out the first time in this race, 54 00:02:27,214 --> 00:02:29,883 he was kind of described as potentially not electable 55 00:02:29,950 --> 00:02:33,453 because statewide, there's there's sometimes, you know, 56 00:02:33,520 --> 00:02:35,923 negative feelings about Milwaukee. There is, you 57 00:02:35,989 --> 00:02:37,858 know, always the racial element of the fact that 58 00:02:37,925 --> 00:02:40,561 there's never been a Black man elected to statewide 59 00:02:40,627 --> 00:02:42,629 office in Wisconsin. So there were all these 60 00:02:42,696 --> 00:02:44,765 questions about him. Then he comes back with the 61 00:02:44,831 --> 00:02:46,733 endorsement of Tony Evers, and all of a sudden he's 62 00:02:46,800 --> 00:02:48,769 described as the establishment. One thing 63 00:02:48,836 --> 00:02:51,038 I've heard from a lot of his supporters is like, 64 00:02:51,104 --> 00:02:54,041 well, which one is it? Is it that he's two Milwaukee 65 00:02:54,107 --> 00:02:56,810 or is he two establishment? He can't be both. Why is he 66 00:02:56,877 --> 00:02:59,646 being held to the standard? And I think he's also 67 00:02:59,713 --> 00:03:01,849 trying to say, you know, I've really kind of had to 68 00:03:01,915 --> 00:03:04,751 fight to get everything that I've ever had. I was 69 00:03:04,818 --> 00:03:07,588 not handed things. I am not on this kind of gilded 70 00:03:07,654 --> 00:03:10,824 establishment path. That this backing and the 71 00:03:10,891 --> 00:03:13,594 resources that will allow me to win. So again, it's a 72 00:03:13,660 --> 00:03:15,929 little bit threading the needle of I'm a viable 73 00:03:15,996 --> 00:03:18,532 candidate, but I will also stand up to the things that 74 00:03:18,599 --> 00:03:21,869 you're angry about. when we start putting 75 00:03:21,935 --> 00:03:23,804 candidates into camps like this, whether this is just 76 00:03:23,871 --> 00:03:26,673 sort of a media narrative that we've created or if 77 00:03:26,740 --> 00:03:28,842 there's something real to it. But I feel like the 78 00:03:28,909 --> 00:03:30,844 fundraising numbers that came out this week, which 79 00:03:30,911 --> 00:03:34,248 do put some substance behind the idea that there 80 00:03:34,314 --> 00:03:37,584 are these camps emerging between Francesca Hong and 81 00:03:37,651 --> 00:03:40,554 David Crowley. What did they show? 82 00:03:40,621 --> 00:03:42,689 >> Well, they showed a couple of things that were 83 00:03:42,756 --> 00:03:45,692 pretty notable. First of all, Crowley raised more 84 00:03:45,759 --> 00:03:48,295 than twice as much money during the month of July, 85 00:03:48,362 --> 00:03:53,600 the most of the month, most raised $776,000 thereabout, 86 00:03:54,568 --> 00:03:59,039 and Huang brought in around $339,000. So that is a big 87 00:03:59,106 --> 00:04:01,975 sign that, at least in terms of money, Crowley's 88 00:04:02,042 --> 00:04:04,778 campaign is getting some backing. And the other sign 89 00:04:04,845 --> 00:04:07,681 that caught my attention was Governor Tony Evers, 90 00:04:07,748 --> 00:04:10,784 you know, who endorsed Crowley's campaign, which 91 00:04:10,851 --> 00:04:13,754 is definitely being framed as an alternative to 92 00:04:13,820 --> 00:04:18,892 Francesca Hong. He also gave $20,000 from his from 93 00:04:18,959 --> 00:04:22,729 Evers campaign account to Crowley's campaign account. 94 00:04:22,796 --> 00:04:25,199 That's not a lot of money, but I was talking with 95 00:04:25,265 --> 00:04:27,501 Anthony Chergosky, the political science professor 96 00:04:27,568 --> 00:04:30,871 over at UW La Crosse, and he said, you know, it's not 97 00:04:30,938 --> 00:04:34,274 a lot of money. $20,000 doesn't buy you a whole lot. 98 00:04:34,341 --> 00:04:38,345 But it could be a signal to Evers donors, Evers 99 00:04:38,412 --> 00:04:41,248 supporters that I'm not just saying I support this, 100 00:04:41,315 --> 00:04:44,518 I'm putting my money behind it. So Chergosky was saying 101 00:04:44,585 --> 00:04:47,621 it's potentially possible that it'll open up some 102 00:04:47,688 --> 00:04:51,458 more of that money from the more moderate, quote 103 00:04:51,525 --> 00:04:53,760 unquote, establishment wing of the party. 104 00:04:53,827 --> 00:04:56,597 >> Yeah, I mean, I think anecdotally, I do see the 105 00:04:56,663 --> 00:04:59,566 message being received as some of these other 106 00:04:59,633 --> 00:05:02,836 candidates campaign signs in my neighborhood anyway 107 00:05:02,903 --> 00:05:06,473 in Madison that we're supporting people like Sara 108 00:05:06,540 --> 00:05:09,510 Rodriguez, for example, have have changed to David 109 00:05:09,576 --> 00:05:12,880 Crowley. I guess my question, though, Zac, is, 110 00:05:12,946 --> 00:05:16,750 can Governor Tony Evers, popular governor, popular 111 00:05:16,817 --> 00:05:20,420 within the party, but a lame duck governor this 112 00:05:20,487 --> 00:05:25,125 late in a primary campaign kind of steer the ship like 113 00:05:25,192 --> 00:05:28,595 this? Can he tell everybody at once at the last minute, 114 00:05:28,662 --> 00:05:31,999 hey, vote for this guy. >> He can try. But the 115 00:05:32,065 --> 00:05:34,368 evidence throughout history shows that endorsements 116 00:05:34,434 --> 00:05:38,238 don't do a lot, especially late. Early endorsements 117 00:05:38,305 --> 00:05:40,974 show that a candidate has viability, early 118 00:05:41,041 --> 00:05:43,143 endorsements from unions or from old political people 119 00:05:43,210 --> 00:05:46,280 can really surge momentum early in the game when it's 120 00:05:46,346 --> 00:05:48,549 necessary for someone like David Crowley to have 121 00:05:48,615 --> 00:05:51,485 boosted his name in a crowded field late in the 122 00:05:51,552 --> 00:05:53,487 game, it has less impact because people have made up 123 00:05:53,554 --> 00:05:55,689 their own minds, and they're less likely to be 124 00:05:55,756 --> 00:05:58,492 swayed by one political figure. They can say, oh, 125 00:05:58,559 --> 00:06:00,594 that's nice, you like him, but I've already had time 126 00:06:00,661 --> 00:06:03,597 to make up my mind, and we've seen it with the 127 00:06:03,664 --> 00:06:05,532 Michigan governor and her endorsement in the Michigan 128 00:06:05,599 --> 00:06:07,434 Senate race and her candidate losing. We've 129 00:06:07,501 --> 00:06:09,436 seen it in other places where endorsements don't 130 00:06:09,503 --> 00:06:11,672 have the same power that maybe they did 20, 30, 40, 131 00:06:11,738 --> 00:06:14,842 50 years ago when bestowing the next person as an 132 00:06:14,908 --> 00:06:17,377 establishment figure meant a lot more than in today's 133 00:06:17,444 --> 00:06:20,581 politics. to frame it as sort of a 134 00:06:20,647 --> 00:06:22,683 binary choice, a two candidate race. It's not 135 00:06:22,749 --> 00:06:24,685 that there are still other candidates in the race. 136 00:06:24,751 --> 00:06:27,321 Senator Kelda Roys, former Department of 137 00:06:27,387 --> 00:06:31,058 Administration Secretary Joel Brennan Ana, how do 138 00:06:31,124 --> 00:06:33,894 they fit into this? And, you know, what could they 139 00:06:33,961 --> 00:06:36,230 play? What role could they play in this primary? 140 00:06:36,296 --> 00:06:39,266 >> Yeah, I mean, we do end up kind of talking. And we 141 00:06:39,333 --> 00:06:42,135 have, for the last couple of weeks about it as almost 142 00:06:42,202 --> 00:06:45,038 a Crowley Hong race. And so they do end up kind of 143 00:06:45,105 --> 00:06:47,241 getting some some perhaps shafting in the 144 00:06:47,307 --> 00:06:49,343 conversation from the media, because I think there's a 145 00:06:49,409 --> 00:06:52,246 sense that this is Hong's race to lose is the phrase 146 00:06:52,312 --> 00:06:54,581 that you've used before. And so it's kind of hung 147 00:06:54,648 --> 00:06:57,317 against everyone else. And so Crowley has been sort of 148 00:06:57,384 --> 00:06:59,486 the anointed one. But then Roys and Brennan are just 149 00:06:59,553 --> 00:07:02,422 kind of in the mix there. And so I think it really is, 150 00:07:02,489 --> 00:07:05,125 again, when we talk about establishment versus 151 00:07:05,192 --> 00:07:07,294 progressive, the other three candidates just kind 152 00:07:07,361 --> 00:07:09,530 of get lumped together. They're obviously trying to 153 00:07:09,596 --> 00:07:12,299 distinguish themselves. Again, when we talk about 154 00:07:12,366 --> 00:07:14,168 endorsements, Kelda Roys got this really important 155 00:07:14,234 --> 00:07:16,770 teachers union endorsement that didn't seem to really 156 00:07:16,837 --> 00:07:19,907 shift anything early on. Whereas, you know, ten, 15 157 00:07:19,973 --> 00:07:22,109 years ago, that would have been a much more meaningful 158 00:07:22,176 --> 00:07:25,045 thing. So again, I think it just kind of speaks to 159 00:07:25,112 --> 00:07:27,848 Francesca Hong is running a really unique, strange race. 160 00:07:27,915 --> 00:07:30,117 She has not raised as much money, but it doesn't seem 161 00:07:30,184 --> 00:07:32,886 to matter. She's making sort of headlines on her 162 00:07:32,953 --> 00:07:35,756 own, sort of organically rather than through these 163 00:07:35,822 --> 00:07:38,392 paid ways. And then all these other candidates are 164 00:07:38,458 --> 00:07:40,561 just trying to kind of trying to to catch up. 165 00:07:40,627 --> 00:07:43,664 >> And she's not putting herself on TV, but other 166 00:07:43,730 --> 00:07:45,566 people are. You've had these Republican groups 167 00:07:45,632 --> 00:07:48,235 consistently putting her in TV ads, calling her liberal 168 00:07:48,302 --> 00:07:51,538 ahead of this primary. >> She has spent $0 on 169 00:07:51,605 --> 00:07:54,208 television, which is just unheard of in any type of 170 00:07:54,274 --> 00:07:56,877 serious race. And she's not running just a serious race. 171 00:07:56,944 --> 00:07:59,379 She's running the leading race. She's doing some, you 172 00:07:59,446 --> 00:08:02,216 know, digital media and things like this. But a lot 173 00:08:02,282 --> 00:08:04,718 of her campaign is very grassroots, very kind of 174 00:08:04,785 --> 00:08:07,688 door to door. And so you're right, when we see if you 175 00:08:07,754 --> 00:08:10,657 see her face on your TV or on your your YouTube, it is 176 00:08:10,724 --> 00:08:12,693 because these Republican groups are paying for ads 177 00:08:12,759 --> 00:08:15,596 trying to get her over the finish line because they 178 00:08:15,662 --> 00:08:17,631 think she's beatable. But meanwhile, she kind of says, 179 00:08:17,698 --> 00:08:19,399 you know, thanks for for calling attention to my 180 00:08:19,466 --> 00:08:22,803 policies. happening in a vacuum. 181 00:08:22,870 --> 00:08:26,006 There is kind of this wave of democratic socialists or 182 00:08:26,073 --> 00:08:27,941 democratic socialists backed candidates around 183 00:08:28,008 --> 00:08:31,545 the country who have done exceedingly well in this 184 00:08:31,612 --> 00:08:34,715 year's politics compared to in previous years. This 185 00:08:34,781 --> 00:08:38,385 week in Michigan, Abdul El-Sayed, a progressive 186 00:08:38,452 --> 00:08:40,754 candidate backed by Democratic Socialist allies, 187 00:08:40,821 --> 00:08:43,223 narrowly won a primary there for a U.S. Senate 188 00:08:43,290 --> 00:08:46,793 seat over an establishment backed congresswoman Ana. I 189 00:08:46,860 --> 00:08:49,062 guess everyone is taking the exact same message from 190 00:08:49,129 --> 00:08:51,532 this one, right? Everyone's on the same page about what 191 00:08:51,598 --> 00:08:53,767 it means for here. >> Yeah. You know, in 192 00:08:53,834 --> 00:08:55,435 politics, everyone just reads everything in the 193 00:08:55,502 --> 00:08:56,837 exact same. >> Way, same page. 194 00:08:56,904 --> 00:08:59,806 >> So of course, you know, again, this, this 195 00:08:59,873 --> 00:09:01,942 year is like, what direction are Democrats 196 00:09:02,009 --> 00:09:04,144 going in? Are they going in this more progressive lane 197 00:09:04,211 --> 00:09:07,648 or not? And so I think for people who want to see that 198 00:09:07,714 --> 00:09:10,484 DSA backing and these kind of more progressive 199 00:09:10,551 --> 00:09:13,954 leanings are are viable in a way that they haven't 200 00:09:14,021 --> 00:09:17,057 been before. El-sayed's victory is a signal of that. 201 00:09:17,124 --> 00:09:20,160 But David Crowley is saying, actually, the fact that it 202 00:09:20,227 --> 00:09:23,764 was so close gives me hope for my campaign because he 203 00:09:23,830 --> 00:09:26,533 had all of this outside funding. He had all of this 204 00:09:26,600 --> 00:09:28,902 outside attention, and he still didn't run away with 205 00:09:28,969 --> 00:09:31,538 it. And so even though, again, we see all these 206 00:09:31,605 --> 00:09:33,540 polling numbers and things like this that indicate 207 00:09:33,607 --> 00:09:35,609 that Hong is currently running away with the 208 00:09:35,676 --> 00:09:37,678 primary, he's saying, we actually might be really 209 00:09:37,744 --> 00:09:40,047 surprised on primary night. >> Yeah, I mean, Rich, we 210 00:09:40,113 --> 00:09:42,950 haven't reported on this. And, you know, we typically 211 00:09:43,016 --> 00:09:45,352 don't talk about these internal polls. But this 212 00:09:45,419 --> 00:09:48,622 one was interesting from the Crowley campaign where 213 00:09:48,689 --> 00:09:53,126 they said, hear me out. This is actually exactly 214 00:09:53,193 --> 00:09:56,463 what we want to hear for Wisconsin's primary. And it 215 00:09:56,530 --> 00:10:00,901 sort of stepped through, I guess, all of the 216 00:10:00,968 --> 00:10:05,539 qualifications that you'd picture, what is Crowley's 217 00:10:05,606 --> 00:10:07,574 camp saying in terms of why Michigan could mean good 218 00:10:07,641 --> 00:10:11,311 things for us? >> Well, for one, they're 219 00:10:13,146 --> 00:10:17,050 saying this memo was saying that the primary polling 220 00:10:17,117 --> 00:10:20,754 that's been done in Wisconsin also just isn't 221 00:10:20,821 --> 00:10:23,624 the kind of polling you want to do to really know 222 00:10:23,690 --> 00:10:26,793 where candidates are at. They said it was top line 223 00:10:26,860 --> 00:10:30,430 and not looking at people who actually vote in these 224 00:10:30,497 --> 00:10:34,768 sorts of primaries. The other thing was that they 225 00:10:34,835 --> 00:10:37,070 were saying that primary voters, you know, because 226 00:10:37,137 --> 00:10:41,475 of past numbers from governor races before and 227 00:10:42,242 --> 00:10:45,846 Senate races, etc. show that in a primary, it's 228 00:10:45,913 --> 00:10:50,484 generally the oldest group, you know, 65 and up that 229 00:10:50,551 --> 00:10:53,120 that vote the most. And they're saying Crowley is 230 00:10:53,187 --> 00:10:55,989 the only candidate talking to directly to those people 231 00:10:56,056 --> 00:10:58,559 right now. So as you mentioned, there were a lot 232 00:10:58,625 --> 00:11:02,029 of qualifiers to get to the part of the memo from the 233 00:11:02,095 --> 00:11:04,731 Crowley camp that said, this is essentially a toss 234 00:11:04,798 --> 00:11:09,169 up between the two of them. So it will be interesting 235 00:11:09,236 --> 00:11:12,840 because what I've also noticed is some Pollers 236 00:11:12,906 --> 00:11:17,144 pollsters have said there's like this 10 to 13 point 237 00:11:17,211 --> 00:11:19,346 error rate kind of built into primary polling. I 238 00:11:19,413 --> 00:11:23,317 mean, that's what we saw in Michigan. El-Sayed was was 239 00:11:23,383 --> 00:11:27,321 leading by 19 points in one of these polls. And the 240 00:11:27,387 --> 00:11:32,359 race came out to be really close. He won, but not by 241 00:11:32,426 --> 00:11:35,429 those sorts of numbers. So what does that say for the 242 00:11:35,495 --> 00:11:38,398 polling that we've been relying on in Wisconsin to 243 00:11:38,465 --> 00:11:41,134 kind of get a sense of who is in the front and who's, 244 00:11:41,201 --> 00:11:44,838 you know, second place, I don't know. 245 00:11:44,905 --> 00:11:48,542 >> Yeah, Zac, if help me walk through this, you had 246 00:11:48,609 --> 00:11:51,778 like basically four things you had to suppose one was 247 00:11:51,845 --> 00:11:54,414 that the primary electorate is not what the polls show. 248 00:11:54,481 --> 00:11:57,284 It's more like 2018, 2020 that those are older voters 249 00:11:57,351 --> 00:12:00,053 and that they're going to go for David Crowley and 250 00:12:00,120 --> 00:12:02,356 that if you really boil it down to a two candidate 251 00:12:02,422 --> 00:12:05,626 race, which is not, he does even better. And when you 252 00:12:05,692 --> 00:12:08,829 inform them of David Crowley that his numbers 253 00:12:08,896 --> 00:12:10,931 get even better and put him over the top. 254 00:12:10,998 --> 00:12:13,700 >> Yeah, there's a lot of assumptions built into this 255 00:12:13,767 --> 00:12:16,837 best case scenario that even then only puts it as a 256 00:12:16,904 --> 00:12:19,339 toss up for David Crowley, but that is the odds that 257 00:12:19,406 --> 00:12:21,708 he's got against him in this scenario. Given all 258 00:12:21,775 --> 00:12:24,478 that we know about the campaigns as they stand 259 00:12:24,545 --> 00:12:26,513 right now, and things that are different from Michigan 260 00:12:26,580 --> 00:12:28,749 is Michigan didn't have multiple candidates that 261 00:12:28,815 --> 00:12:31,285 had already secured absentee votes and then 262 00:12:31,351 --> 00:12:34,555 dropped out of the race. We don't know how many votes 263 00:12:34,621 --> 00:12:37,457 have already been cast for Sara Rodriguez for Mandela 264 00:12:37,524 --> 00:12:39,660 Barnes, but I know there are some because I've 265 00:12:39,726 --> 00:12:42,429 talked to voters who said I already voted for them. 266 00:12:42,496 --> 00:12:44,565 Those votes aren't coming back. They are gone. They 267 00:12:44,631 --> 00:12:46,733 will not impact the winner. Other than the margin of 268 00:12:46,800 --> 00:12:49,436 difference and questions of, hey, would that have made a 269 00:12:49,503 --> 00:12:51,605 difference if they had dropped out earlier, or if 270 00:12:51,672 --> 00:12:54,474 those voters had waited, or if they could have spoiled 271 00:12:54,541 --> 00:12:56,577 those ballots and recast them? Those are all things 272 00:12:56,643 --> 00:12:59,413 we won't know. A lot of this is in hindsight. It'll 273 00:12:59,479 --> 00:13:02,516 all make a lot more sense. Right now, it's a lot of 274 00:13:02,583 --> 00:13:04,418 projection and it's Crowley saying, hey, don't count me 275 00:13:04,484 --> 00:13:06,486 out. Don't just front runner away to Franco 276 00:13:06,553 --> 00:13:08,755 because she's in the lead right now. I have a 277 00:13:08,822 --> 00:13:11,925 legitimate chance. So if you believe this talk about 278 00:13:11,992 --> 00:13:14,394 establishment and I'm the man, then vote for me. 279 00:13:14,461 --> 00:13:17,497 >> All right? As our election becomes the next 280 00:13:17,564 --> 00:13:20,534 big thing in U.S. politics, we're seeing more national 281 00:13:20,601 --> 00:13:23,837 attention and scrutiny of Francesca Hong. That 282 00:13:23,904 --> 00:13:26,640 social media feed, old tweets, including one where 283 00:13:26,707 --> 00:13:29,910 she talked about Thanksgiving in a since 284 00:13:29,977 --> 00:13:32,813 deleted tweet from 2020, she said, quote, Cancel 285 00:13:32,880 --> 00:13:35,649 Thanksgiving should have done this in 16, 20, 21, 286 00:13:35,716 --> 00:13:38,352 1621. If it takes a worldwide pandemic for us 287 00:13:38,418 --> 00:13:41,088 to realize we should stop celebrating colonialism and 288 00:13:41,154 --> 00:13:43,290 the original super spreader event that killed 289 00:13:43,357 --> 00:13:47,427 indigenous folks and women, so be it. An open question 290 00:13:47,494 --> 00:13:52,065 to the group here. Is this tweet relevant in 2026? 291 00:13:53,767 --> 00:13:56,403 >> It is, and that people are talking about it. It's 292 00:13:56,470 --> 00:13:58,805 we're talking about it here. It's made national news, 293 00:13:58,872 --> 00:14:00,841 national headlines, and you know, who loves to hear 294 00:14:00,908 --> 00:14:03,477 about this? It's the Republicans in Tom Tiffany. 295 00:14:03,544 --> 00:14:07,047 So I think the context that can be added to this tweet 296 00:14:07,114 --> 00:14:10,184 is 2020 is when Francesca Hong was first running for 297 00:14:10,250 --> 00:14:14,321 the assembly, running in a very liberal district in 298 00:14:14,388 --> 00:14:17,457 Madison in an open primary. So everything she was 299 00:14:17,524 --> 00:14:20,027 saying, whether she believes it now or wants to 300 00:14:20,093 --> 00:14:24,031 talk about it now, she was saying to a liberal primary 301 00:14:24,097 --> 00:14:27,835 audience in Madison in 2020, coming out of the George 302 00:14:27,901 --> 00:14:30,838 Floyd protests, coming out of Covid, all the 303 00:14:30,904 --> 00:14:32,940 situations around that, when you put it in context, 304 00:14:33,006 --> 00:14:35,509 her tweets look like a candidate running for that 305 00:14:35,576 --> 00:14:38,078 office at that time, the fact that she is a 306 00:14:38,145 --> 00:14:40,280 different candidate running for a different office 307 00:14:40,347 --> 00:14:42,482 today, we've seen this from lots of politicians who say, 308 00:14:42,549 --> 00:14:45,118 yeah, let's not talk about that. That was my race for 309 00:14:45,185 --> 00:14:47,654 state Senate. That was my race for assembly. Not 310 00:14:47,721 --> 00:14:49,957 every politician will always love the stuff 311 00:14:50,023 --> 00:14:52,960 that's dug up from past votes or past campaigns, 312 00:14:53,026 --> 00:14:55,796 but she does have to deal with it. And so that is 313 00:14:55,863 --> 00:14:57,831 what her campaign is having to handle right now. 314 00:14:57,898 --> 00:15:00,767 >> Yeah, I guess. >> I mean, I think about 315 00:15:00,834 --> 00:15:03,003 politics as sort of a the customer is always right 316 00:15:03,070 --> 00:15:04,905 business, the customer being the voter, where even 317 00:15:04,972 --> 00:15:07,741 if you don't think they're right, you're in the 318 00:15:07,808 --> 00:15:09,910 business as a candidate of winning votes. And so if 319 00:15:09,977 --> 00:15:12,579 enough people want to pay attention to a tweet about 320 00:15:12,646 --> 00:15:15,883 Thanksgiving, you got a choice to make rich. Do you 321 00:15:15,949 --> 00:15:19,052 either kind of hope it moves on to the next news 322 00:15:19,119 --> 00:15:21,688 cycle or you say something about it? How is Francesca 323 00:15:21,755 --> 00:15:25,592 Hong been handling it? >> Well, to me, it seems 324 00:15:25,659 --> 00:15:30,230 like she's tried both. She's initially she was 325 00:15:30,297 --> 00:15:32,699 saying things like, well, if Republicans want to 326 00:15:32,766 --> 00:15:35,669 focus on that sort of stuff, you know, we're busy 327 00:15:35,736 --> 00:15:38,539 reaching out to voters and building up our support. ET 328 00:15:38,605 --> 00:15:41,441 cetera. ET cetera. So she was kind of waving it off. 329 00:15:41,508 --> 00:15:46,079 But this week we saw hung kind of backtrack on that 330 00:15:48,315 --> 00:15:52,152 tweet in particular, and a whole other slew of tweets 331 00:15:52,219 --> 00:15:55,422 calling for from the past, calling for abolishing 332 00:15:55,489 --> 00:15:58,025 police, abolishing Ice, abolishing the US Senate. 333 00:15:58,091 --> 00:16:01,495 ET cetera. ET cetera. So but with regard to the 334 00:16:01,562 --> 00:16:06,233 Thanksgiving tweet this week, she said to CNN, she 335 00:16:07,401 --> 00:16:09,837 didn't really say whether or not she still supports, 336 00:16:09,903 --> 00:16:12,372 you know, canceling Thanksgiving. She said it's 337 00:16:12,439 --> 00:16:15,542 a that holiday brings a lot of pain to a lot of 338 00:16:15,609 --> 00:16:18,912 communities. But she stopped short of of giving 339 00:16:18,979 --> 00:16:21,715 a definitive answer. And then on Wednesday, she was 340 00:16:21,782 --> 00:16:25,586 asked by Politico about that tweet and she said, or 341 00:16:25,652 --> 00:16:28,188 they they asked what her favorite holiday is, and 342 00:16:28,255 --> 00:16:30,457 she said, Thanksgiving. She said, I don't want to 343 00:16:30,524 --> 00:16:34,995 cancel it. I love it. So that's obviously kind of 344 00:16:35,762 --> 00:16:38,599 backtracking. Whether that's because she saw this 345 00:16:38,665 --> 00:16:42,803 as a liability or she's trying to put it to rest, I 346 00:16:42,870 --> 00:16:45,839 don't know. But that and also she said, you know, in 347 00:16:45,906 --> 00:16:49,109 the televised debate not long ago and in these media 348 00:16:49,176 --> 00:16:52,613 interviews at the national level, she said, well, I as 349 00:16:52,679 --> 00:16:56,817 governor can't defund the police. And, you know, she 350 00:16:56,884 --> 00:16:59,953 she essentially walked back those as well. So it's been 351 00:17:00,020 --> 00:17:03,323 really interesting to see, not surprising for a person 352 00:17:03,390 --> 00:17:07,060 in that position, but always notable. 353 00:17:07,127 --> 00:17:09,563 >> And, you know, you alluded to the office she's 354 00:17:09,630 --> 00:17:12,132 running for now. You get a different flavor of tweet 355 00:17:12,199 --> 00:17:17,037 from her or I guess a post on X now than you did then. 356 00:17:17,104 --> 00:17:19,273 She's made recent posts about Thanksgiving, this 357 00:17:19,339 --> 00:17:24,077 one from last year where she talked about supporting 358 00:17:24,144 --> 00:17:28,749 the Goodman Center in a fund drive. A crucial note 359 00:17:28,815 --> 00:17:32,286 there she is dressed up in one of those pictures as a 360 00:17:32,352 --> 00:17:35,522 turkey. So seems like fully embracing the Thanksgiving 361 00:17:35,589 --> 00:17:38,692 holiday right now. Anya, we cannot talk about social 362 00:17:38,759 --> 00:17:42,362 media without mentioning Dirt McGirk social media 363 00:17:42,429 --> 00:17:46,900 account. Run by David Crowley circa 2010. Has his 364 00:17:46,967 --> 00:17:48,468 social media past come back to haunt him? 365 00:17:48,535 --> 00:17:52,606 >> I mean, it was kind of the first like, opposition 366 00:17:52,673 --> 00:17:55,342 dump that came out after he reentered the race. And so 367 00:17:55,409 --> 00:17:57,644 these are old tweets, as you mentioned, from about 368 00:17:57,711 --> 00:18:02,115 15 years ago, very reflective of a 24 year old 369 00:18:02,182 --> 00:18:04,351 sort of out in the world with this new technology 370 00:18:04,418 --> 00:18:07,487 where you get to just announce every single 371 00:18:07,554 --> 00:18:10,357 as you're having it. If we all recall what Twitter was 372 00:18:10,424 --> 00:18:13,260 like in the year 2010. So that was a short news cycle. 373 00:18:13,327 --> 00:18:16,163 I don't think it was a fairly significant one. He 374 00:18:16,230 --> 00:18:18,665 certainly said, you know, I was a knucklehead. I don't 375 00:18:18,732 --> 00:18:21,235 stand by some of the more problematic parts of those 376 00:18:21,301 --> 00:18:23,504 tweets. And, and I do kind of, you know, to play 377 00:18:23,570 --> 00:18:26,573 devil's advocate about how voters feel about tweets. I 378 00:18:26,640 --> 00:18:29,409 have this question of whether, you know, voters 379 00:18:29,476 --> 00:18:32,145 sort of see what they want to see in these. If you 380 00:18:32,212 --> 00:18:34,281 want to oppose David Crowley, you can point to 381 00:18:34,348 --> 00:18:37,150 these tweets as a reason why you don't trust him or 382 00:18:37,217 --> 00:18:39,686 like him or approve of his character. And likewise 383 00:18:39,753 --> 00:18:42,422 with Fran Hong, if you do like them, then you can 384 00:18:42,489 --> 00:18:45,325 it's very easy to kind of dismiss it. I saw some of 385 00:18:45,392 --> 00:18:47,294 Fran Hong's supporters pulling out other times 386 00:18:47,361 --> 00:18:49,296 that she has knocked other holidays. She's talked 387 00:18:49,363 --> 00:18:51,665 about how in restaurants she wants to kick out 388 00:18:51,732 --> 00:18:54,034 everyone who shows up in Halloween costumes, that 389 00:18:54,101 --> 00:18:56,036 she hates Valentine's Day, like working those shifts 390 00:18:56,103 --> 00:18:59,006 in restaurants. So making more of a joke about it 391 00:18:59,072 --> 00:19:01,141 that this is just learning more about their 392 00:19:01,208 --> 00:19:03,644 personality and their character. And I think, you 393 00:19:03,710 --> 00:19:07,147 know, we've spent ten, 15 years now having so much 394 00:19:07,214 --> 00:19:09,950 exposure to politicians through social media in a 395 00:19:10,017 --> 00:19:12,653 way that they don't need to be mediated through kind of 396 00:19:12,719 --> 00:19:15,322 traditional media, that I think a lot of voters are 397 00:19:15,389 --> 00:19:17,391 kind of used to these more human sides. I mean, we 398 00:19:17,457 --> 00:19:19,826 also saw with Graham Plattner what I would 399 00:19:19,893 --> 00:19:22,462 describe as like really kind of horrible social 400 00:19:22,529 --> 00:19:27,434 media posts about rape victims and other things 401 00:19:27,501 --> 00:19:29,903 that voters really kind of excused because they wanted 402 00:19:29,970 --> 00:19:32,806 to see the best in this politician that they really 403 00:19:32,873 --> 00:19:35,442 admired and supported his policies. And so I think to 404 00:19:35,509 --> 00:19:37,511 a certain extent, we're going to see how important 405 00:19:37,578 --> 00:19:40,480 these kinds of things are. And I don't really know 406 00:19:40,547 --> 00:19:44,785 that it moves your average voter other than to sort of 407 00:19:44,852 --> 00:19:47,187 put them in the camp that they might have been going 408 00:19:47,254 --> 00:19:49,489 to either way. >> Yeah. In a, in an era 409 00:19:49,556 --> 00:19:52,192 when the president has been known to say some stuff on 410 00:19:52,259 --> 00:19:54,127 social media. >> To govern through. 411 00:19:54,194 --> 00:19:56,563 >> Social media. >> These are sort of tame 412 00:19:56,630 --> 00:19:59,299 by comparison in Wisconsin. That's all the time we have 413 00:19:59,366 --> 00:20:01,602 for today. Thanks for joining us. This has been 414 00:20:01,668 --> 00:20:04,271 inside Wisconsin politics. Be sure to follow us on PBS, 415 00:20:04,338 --> 00:20:06,340 wisconsin.org, WPR.org, YouTube, or wherever you 416 00:20:06,406 --> 00:20:08,208 get your podcasts.