Inside Wisconsin Politics

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 Shawn Johnson here with Anya van here with Anya van Wagtendonk and Zac Schultz.

Hey.

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.

Then 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.

Zac, is it still crowded or is 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 Sara Rodriguez, that there is an establishment going on and that fits with 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.

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 Zac sort of hit the nail on 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 I all I want is for a Democrat to win.

And David Crowley 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 Sara 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 Hong progressive lane?

Is it the Rodriguez, Moore sort of establishment lane?

Nobody that I've heard has come out and said, well, we got to stop Francesca Hong, you know, 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, you know, Democratic Socialist caucus that's 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 that is still the goal is for the Democrats in their minds, is to beat Tom Tiffany.

And whether that is Francesca Hong or whether that's Sara or Brennan or Roys 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.

There's still million dollar ad buys coming up.

Kelda Roys 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 from here until August.

There's going to be some fireworks as they try and create that last separation to over the 30 to 35% that may be 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 frontrunners 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 have the cities on lock.

I am a Milwaukee native.

I have been able to work with the suburbs.

I represent a county that straddles suburban and urban areas, and I can hold the line on rural areas.

So he was essentially making this 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 profiles, pour one out for my having a little bit free time this weekend.

But you know, you always look for both 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 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, 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, that 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 f you to, to some of the, the institutions that they are not feeling very happy with right now.

So I think Sara Rodriguez would obviously say this is great for me.

He's endorsing me.

Did you notice that this is a unquestionably good news for me?

Is there a case that this is good for Mandela Barnes?

His campaign says, yes, we benefit the most.

He's willing to show.

It already making that case and everyone's inboxes that will listen.

And I think there's a rational argument for 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 has 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 pitch is I've worked with people to help rural Wisconsin with his bills for for local issues.

So there's an argument at 1 Optic that this absolutely should help Mandela Barnes.

And then there is the 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 government work and won't be too crazy or too loud?

More of a Tony Evers Steil or shucks, let's all work together and make things function.

Or were they looking at him as more of a. We need someone from that part of the state to fight for us.

And that goes back to that original argument we've been having.

So we're 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, just 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 place you're going to see in a few months.

And so in that context, how does it matter, I guess, when Sara Rodriguez says, I'm going to have $1 million 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 $1 million to spend on this ad, but then it's also money as a signal, as sort of a signal of your strength, a 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 twofer 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, of come and get me.

I kind of wondered if that was a factor in Crowley dropping out, actually, you know, because they happened 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 a certain date, we're still viable.

And one of the things he said in his drop out 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.

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.

Zac, the, the tone of the ad is, well, well, she 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.

I think.

first reaction that I have is, this is a sign of the coarseness of American politics.

Since Donald and 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 you know, maybe not the dinner table, but at least at the bar or 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 it, he really means it.

And if someone else says it, oh, that's that's coarse and disgusting.

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, Shawn, of the establishment versus the 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 who 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'd just let one linger as she bid farewell to her.

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.

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.

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.

And 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 grand platinum 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, wanted his politics, if not sort of all of the other things that went along with it.

So they're waiting to see whether 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 threw his own money and threw 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 U.S.

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 or how much does that loss in the Senate race still linger over the top of them, as 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 frontrunner 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 Sara Rodriguez make that same general argument.

Look, these candidates are coming in endorsing me.

The state party at the in the 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.

Well, 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 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, 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, 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, etc.

will throw their weight behind one candidate and see if they can pick up, you know, whatever that is, six months or six weeks, eight weeks of momentum.

On top of everything that Tom Tiffany has essentially had since January.

Yeah, you did see the Democratic Governors 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 Fashioneds 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 got to talk about the vice president coming to Wisconsin.

He does that from time to time.

Zac, why?

It's not a presidential year.

He wasn't in a swing district.

What was he doing here?

Well, anytime 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, Republicans coming in constantly.

It's just they held a fundraiser and 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 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 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.

Ana 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 Derrick Van Orden to Bryan Steil.

targeted Republicans in Yeah.

So just again, sort of bringing some national attention, some 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, you know, rooting out corruption.

And like they are going to be the honest and transparent arm of government, which is a sort of interesting tack 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 Kremer will be back next week.

This has been inside Wisconsin politics.

Be sure to follow us on PBS wisconsin.org.

WPR.org, YouTube, or wherever you get your podcasts.