The
field of candidates in Wisconsin's Democratic primary for governor gets smaller as the campaign
ad war heats up and the vice president visits Wisconsin.
This is Inside Wisconsin Politics.
I'm Sean Johnson here with Anya Van Wankton-Dank and Zach Schultz, say you too.
So we've been talking about this as a crowded Democratic primary for a long time now and
we had seven Democratic candidates just a few weeks ago.
And that was narrowed down to six as Missy Hughes got out of the race.
David Crowley this week gets out of the race.
Now we're down to five.
Zach, is it still crowded or has this race shifted to you in a meaningful way?
I think the crowd, it depends more on the lanes of what we're talking about.
I think there's clearly a progressive lane.
There's clearly a more establishment center government lane.
And then there's a question of if there's room in between for any of the rest of them
to kind of stake their own area or if they're competing for those two groups.
But there clearly is this sense as the two candidates have dropped out that have now
endorsed Sarah Rodriguez, that there is an establishment going on.
And that fits this national theme that we're seeing of establishment Dems worrying about
progressive Dems potentially undermining chances to win seats in November versus progressives
who are saying no, we are the ones that are going to win these primaries and win in November
get behind us as we keep going forward.
So there's definitely a shrinkage there, but it's almost a shrinkage into lanes as opposed
to these individual candidates.
Anya, how do you see those lanes?
I mean, I think just a few weeks ago, I was kind of having a hard time putting the candidates
into different lanes or buckets.
However you want to do it, what are the lanes now as you see it?
Yeah, I think that sort of hit the nail in the head with establishment versus progressive.
And one way that we're seeing that is when these candidates are dropping out that they
are endorsing other candidates.
There's a world in which you drop out and you say, I love my party and all I want is
for a Democrat to win.
And David Crawley did that kind of initially in his original announcement that he was stepping
down.
He didn't immediately endorse anyone.
He said the most important thing is just that somebody beats Tom Tiffany in the fall.
And then this morning came out and endorsed Sarah Rodriguez.
So I think that's a sign that people are kind of choosing teams and trying to say who do
I think is the best ability for Democrats to win in November.
Is it the sort of hung progressive lane?
Is it the Rodriguez more sort of establishment lane?
Nobody that I've heard has come out and said, well, we got to stop Francesca Hong.
But we've seen this debate that you've referenced at the national level where you have sort
of the national establishment Democrats fighting against this Democratic socialist caucus this
growing.
Is there an unspoken, we got to stop Francesca Hong in all this or are we making that up?
Are we looking for conflict where there is none here in Wisconsin?
I don't think it would be wise for anyone to say that out loud from the Democratic Party
because there's a very good chance that Hong can win this.
And then they have to unite behind her.
So that is the the other half of this game is you can drop out and you can endorse someone
that you would prefer.
But then you still want to create a sense of party unity that like that is still the
goal is for the Democrats in their minds is to beat Tom Tiffany and whether that is
Francesca Hong, whether that's Sarah Rodriguez or Mandela Barnes or Brennan or Roy's or
anyone that's still in this race at this point, they have to worry about that in the long
run.
So in the short run, we're not seeing some of the disunity of attacking each other that
was a potential with a more crowded race.
There's still time and there's still million dollar ad buys coming up.
Count of Roy's just announced an hour ago that she's got 1.2 million that she's going
to announce and she's going to spend every last penny of it.
She's not going to drop out of this race.
And she has a history in some of these big competitive elections of going a little contrarian
towards the end.
So I don't think it's going to be all quiet and rosy from here until August.
There's going to be some fireworks as they try and create that last separation to hopefully
put themselves over the 30 to 35 percent that maybe needed to win.
Anya, you were all set to do this profile of David Crowley, which you know, it just sounds
like it's not going to happen at this point.
But can you kind of talk through why it didn't work out for his campaign from your perspective?
I mean, there's a world where you can imagine David Crowley being seen as one of the front
runners in this race and it never felt like that way as this campaign unfolded.
Yeah.
One of the ways that he was positioning himself throughout was essentially, you know, I had
the cities on lock.
I am a Milwaukee native.
I have been able to work with the suburbs.
I represent a county that, you know, straddles suburban and urban areas and I can hold the
line on rural areas.
So he was essentially making this pitch of like, I can be this kind of statewide candidate
for many people.
One of the things that came up while I was trying to write this profile that is no longer,
you know, whenever we write profile, poor went out for my having a little bit free time
this weekend.
But, you know, you always look for both, you know, supporters and critics.
And I could not find a critic of David Crowley.
I called people who have been on the record criticizing his, you know, his policies and
some of how he's handled, for example, the lapse of health insurance at the county level.
And even his like most vocal critics were like, I really like him as a person.
And I think he'd work really well in Madison.
And these are like conservative Republicans that I'm calling.
And so I think that was kind of where he fit in is this really kind of affable person
who gets along well with who plays nice with others.
And I think in a certain way, what we're seeing is that maybe that is not as appealing to
voters.
Voters are mad and things are really hard for a lot of people right now.
And maybe they want somebody who seems like a little bit of a fighter, maybe like a little
bit of a FU to some of the institutions that they are not feeling very happy with right
now.
So I think Sarah Rodriguez would obviously say, this is great for me.
He's endorsing me.
Did you notice that?
This is unquestionably good news for me.
Is there a case that this is good for Mandela Barnes?
These campaigns says, yes, we benefit the most.
They're calling to show it.
Already making that case, and everyone's in boxes that will listen.
And I think there's a rational argument, especially for those that kind of follow this
from a distance that put people into those other broader categories.
If we have two African American men with Milwaukee roots that have connections to that part of
the state, deep establishment ties to winning lots of local elections there, that you could
argue that some people may say, well, that's a natural transition.
If you liked David Crowley, you should also like Mandela Barnes.
They don't have the same electoral history.
They don't have the same record of working in Madison.
They have challenged Mandela Barnes as challenged members within his own party.
He's run a statewide contest.
David Crowley is known for working more with Republicans as part of his pitches.
I've worked with people to help rural Wisconsin with his bills for local issues.
So there's an argument at one optic that this absolutely should help Mandela Barnes.
And then there is the other end of it of who, if there is 5% that Crowley had in the state.
Were they looking at him as more of that centrist candidate that can know how to make government
work and won't be too crazy or too loud, more of a Tony Evers style, aw, shocks let's
all work together and make things function, or were they looking at him as more of a,
we need some of them from that part of the state to fight for us.
And that goes back to that original argument we've been having.
So were his 5% those let's get it done or let's fight?
I think that could determine where some of those voters go.
And I think it's a sign that this race has kind of flown under the radar this year in
that we haven't heard people complaining about, gosh, you're being bombarded by all these
political ads.
There has not been an advertising blitz in this race the way that we've seen in, you
know, the races for Supreme Court that we're used to by now or a November general election
campaign, you know, the kind of ad bliss you're going to see in a few months.
And so in that context, how does it matter, I guess when Sarah Rodriguez says, I'm going
to have a million dollar ad buy that I'm going to pay for with my campaign in this sort of,
you know, under the radar race.
You know, one person I once spoke to a political scientist I once spoke to kind of explained
that money in politics kind of serves two functions.
So there's money as money, right, like the thing that you use to buy things.
And she has a million dollars to spend on this ad.
But then it's also money as a signal is sort of a signal of your strength, the signal
of, you know, maybe I want other candidates to kind of back off because I have this in
my bank account.
What do you have?
And so in this case, it's kind of that that to fur where both she will be able to get
a pretty sizable amount of spread for her money paying directly from her campaign.
But then also it signals to the other candidates like what do you got, right?
And so it kind of again is her kind of establishing that she is a front runner because she has
this money to spend.
And so maybe she's also trying to, you know, sort of intimidate others who may not have
that, right?
Like she's sending the signal of come and get me.
I kind of wondered if that was a factor in Crowley dropping out actually, you know, because
they happen pretty close together.
And I imagine a decision like that builds up more than just overnight.
And it came right after the fundraising deadline.
And so it's possible, you know, that campaigns have their internal goals of like if we hit
X by certain date, we're still viable.
And one of the things he said in his dropout was like, it is clear I will not become
the Democratic nominee.
And so clearly there's like a calculus of what makes that clear and maybe money was part
of it.
Yeah, you know, she's got at least $1 million according to her.
And she has this outside group that has been spending money on her behalf kind of throughout
the year.
And they don't have to report their donors and kind of like the Wild West in terms of
fundraising.
The tone of the ad is, well, what says a bad word to start out with?
There's a bleep off the top of the ad.
And that's obviously very intentional.
They craft these ads with a lot of money spent on the people writing the ads, speaking to
specific audiences.
And I think there's a lot to actually analyze within the decision of that word alone off
the top of the ad.
I think so, too.
I think the first reaction that I have is this is a sign of the coarseness of American
politics since Donald Trump entered the platform in the atmosphere more than a decade ago is
that it's acceptable for your political candidate to use an expletive in their ad.
Even if it's bleeped out as a way of showing their rawness, their approachability, the
way that normal people speak at maybe not the dinner table, but at least at the bar with
friends.
I think there's a sense of that does make them more real in the same way that Tony Evers
has been let off the hook time and time again for swearing over and over because he seems
like this kind old man.
And when he says that he really means it, and if someone else says it, oh, that's course
and disgust.
So it's definitely a change in that atmosphere, but it also goes back to the original question
we have.
This is a nicely themed episode, Sean, of the establishment versus the rage.
If Rodriguez does represent the establishment in the center, she is the lieutenant governor
at this point, but she's the one showing a little more flair, a little more fight with
the words that she's dropping off the top and talking about she'll fight for you.
She's definitely reaching out to bring the rest of that democratic primary audience over
to her to say, I'm not just the person that is the establishment and that I'm the
sitting lieutenant governor and the first person to enter the race.
I'm also the person that will swear and fight for you.
The other person likes to swear a lot in this race, Francesca Hong, she's got a history
of dropping a few F bombs out there.
So I think that shows this broad spectrum and this interest in these two different categories
of voters.
Yeah, I mean, I'm reminded that Francesca Hong in, I believe her introductory speech
in the assembly dropped an F bomb and in her final speech in the assembly, if you ever
had a chance to see that, she just let one linger as she forbid we're farewell to
her colleagues.
And plenty in between.
Those weren't the only two.
No, they're not.
I think it's expected.
I mean, I think it's expected that in today's politics right now, I think Democrats are
so mad at President Trump that you have to show in your ads that you're not just like
an old time Democrat that you're going to get up there and fight, fight, fight.
I mean, that is the word.
And again, that you are not sort of part of this establishment that people are so angry
with and do see as, you know, too moderate or too incremental.
And so they don't want these sort of consultant polished candidates, right?
They want people who are more real.
That's certainly part of the appeal of Hong.
I keep hearing that from voters who support her is that she seems like she is who she's
always been in the same way that you kind of hear about Bernie Sanders.
And you know, it's hard this week to talk about politics without mentioning sort of
the Graham Plattner situation in Maine, but one of the kind of series of reactions
to that has been now that he's dropped out, the progressive wing saying, okay, but voters
clearly wanted his politics, if not sort of all of the other things that went along
with it.
So they're waiting to see whether, you know, the Democratic Party, if they try to shoehorn
in a more establishment sort of candidate.
And so I think we're seeing these like real fights.
And so Wisconsin, I think, will be another kind of bellwether, maybe not in the sort
of fireworks and really scandalous way of what's going on in Maine, but I think
that we're having sort of our own version of that play out right here.
Yeah.
I mean, I think nationalize or elsewhere right now, but over the next month, we are going
to have a real debate among Democrats here about what it means to be their party in
2026.
What about Mandela Barnes as we kind of look at other advertising in this race?
He is one of the other candidates who at least through his own money and through that
outside money has been up on the air, right?
He's gotten out there that it's hard to figure out if he's rerunning his Senate race and
living off that experience of like, I'm the guy you remember, you liked me before.
I got the most votes of anyone who's lost a US Senate race.
I should have won, but I was the only one that lost to an incumbent.
Or if he's running a new race, but it doesn't feel like there's a different message than
there was before.
So he's definitely running on that platform.
And the question is, where does he fall within these frameworks we've talked about
because he's got establishment history.
He's also got very progressive history.
The question is, does he carry through to voters to say, no, I'm the best of both worlds.
And how much does that loss in the Senate race still linger over the top of them?
His opponents have used it against them on the campaign trail.
It does seem like when he got into the race, his message was, I am the front runner here.
You know, it's just a matter of time.
I am going to set the agenda in this race and I'm focused on November.
You're now starting to see Sarah Rodriguez make that same general argument.
Look, these candidates are coming in endorsing me.
The state party in these straw polls has been supporting me.
But you know, we don't know.
We don't know.
Mandela Barnes did come in here with actual name recognition that nobody else could really
match.
And so we'll find out soon whether the other candidates have kind of cracked the consciousness
of people who've been on their summer breaks here.
And one thing that should also be noted is that while the Democrats are kind of working
all of this out amongst themselves and we are devoting so much airtime to what they're
talking about, Tom Tiffany essentially has the Republican field to himself.
And so he just launched his own, his, I think, fourth ad campaign.
And it shows him having a pancake breakfast.
And it's like this very kind of wholesome, folksy, you know, all American, I'm a normal
guy, you betcha, right?
And because he kind of has the field to himself, he doesn't need to be kind of parsing those
details.
And I think it's really good for Republicans that Democrats are kind of out there splitting
hairs in all of these different ways, splitting donors and right, splitting attention while
Tom Tiffany can just sort of like have the field to himself.
And so I think we're also going to see a real shift in dynamic after the primary because
that's when all of these national Democratic groups, et cetera, will throw their weight
behind one candidate and see if they can pick up, you know, whatever that is, six months,
or six weeks, 80 weeks of momentum on top of everything that Tom Tiffany has essentially
had since January.
Yeah, you did see the Democratic governor's association through an affiliated group start
running ads against him this week.
But you're right.
He has spent millions of dollars just painting himself as Mr. Wisconsin love pancakes, old
fashions, just kind of like your neighbor, basically.
What's that primary is done?
There's just going to be an onslaught of money, though.
We had to talk about the vice president coming to Wisconsin.
He does that from time to time.
Zach, why?
It's not a presidential year.
He wasn't in a swing district.
What was he doing here?
Well, any time a Republican comes to Milwaukee, they're there to raise money, first and foremost.
The difference is he actually held an event open to the public on top of it during the
Bush era.
The Republicans coming in constantly is just they held a fundraiser in left town with
the money, not with any ad recognition.
But he's still here campaigning.
He's campaigning for Tom Tiffany.
He's campaigning for himself.
No matter what Donald Trump thinks, he can't run for president again.
And JD Vance wants to be the presumptive Republican nominee in 28.
No one's is beyond looking two years ahead.
That's actually a short window for them to be looking ahead.
So this was entirely political, no matter what the platform on the stage said.
Yeah, campaigning is kind of like exercise, right?
Like even when you don't feel like doing it, it seems like candidates feel like they got
to keep coming to these swing states, just kind of rinse and repeat.
Anya, anything in the message, stand out, or just the visit as a whole, stand out to you
about why JD Vance is here now?
I mean, yeah, I think you can't in an election year ignore Wisconsin or other swing states.
I think he was also campaigning for Derek Van Orden to say.
And Brian's style, yep, the two kind of targeted Republicans in Wisconsin.
Yeah.
So just again, sort of bringing some national attention, some money, but also he had this
message around fraud and rooting out fraud and sort of the federal government's response
to fraud.
And so I think this is a way in which we're seeing that concept emerge as an election
year issue of sort of rooting out corruption and like they are going to be the honest and
transparent arm of government, which is a sort of interesting tactic to take at a time
that I think people are much more concerned about, you know, prices than necessarily
the specter of fraud that again, sort of there's no evidence actually exists.
All right.
That's all the time we have for today.
Thanks for joining us.
Our colleague Rich Kramer will be back next week.
This has been Inside Wisconsin Politics.
Be sure to follow us on PBSWisconsin.org, WPR.org, YouTube, or wherever you get your podcasts.