My first reaction to Susan Crawford’s resounding Wisconsin Supreme Court victory excluded Elon Musk, which made me an outlier given my reading of mainstream and social media.
My thoughts instead went to how her election marks a last step in moving Wisconsin beyond 15 years or more in which Republicans have dominated the statehouse, even when they lacked the public’s support in our famously 50-50 state.
To me, nothing less than the future of fair and representative government in Wisconsin was on the ballot. Republicans had long rigged the system through diabolical and unprecedented gerrymandering of political boundaries, and now that era appears over for good.
That is my first takeaway. I defer to others on what the election means to Musk, and indirectly to President Trump, as they endeavor to deconstruct the federal government and ruin our democracy.
My second takeaway is that progressive and moderate voters should recognize that the sea change before us is due to major contributions from four people. I see them as heroes, and I’ll talk about them more in a minute.
Another quick impression.
Wasn’t it surreal to witness such a bright and sustained national media spotlight on Wisconsin, especially on Madison? It was without a doubt the most intense coverage of a state judicial race in U.S. history.
Watching CNN’s Jake Tapper and John King manipulate their computerized maps made the evening feel like a national — even presidential — election. I thought of the phrase made famous by 1968 anti-Vietnam protesters who chanted in Chicago: “The whole world is watching.”
Indeed, it was.
To my main point: It is hard to overstate how positive Crawford’s victory is for everyone in Wisconsin other than MAGA devotees. At the risk of covering familiar ground among political junkies, here is some historical context.
Ever since Republican Scott Walker was elected governor in 2010, Wisconsin Republicans have connived to acquire and hold power regardless of actual voter sentiments.
The result was a state government that has starved public education funding, given tax breaks to fat cats, reduced union rights, restricted reproductive freedoms, rejected available federal health care funds, and on and on. Turning Wisconsin into a Mississippi with cold winters seemed to be their goal.
That was enabled, of course, by gerrymandering sanctioned by Walker and protected by far-right control of the high court until two years ago.
By replacing a retiring moderate Supreme Court justice, Crawford’s victory protects the fairer state legislative maps that resulted in the election of 14 more Democratic legislators in the state Assembly and Senate last fall.
It also sets the stage for redrawing congressional boundaries that have allowed Republicans to control six of eight Wisconsin congressional seats even though Wisconsin’s partisan makeup is 50-50.
Walker’s attacks on public employee union rights in his first term were more about politics than saving taxpayers from adequately compensating teachers. He was able to emasculate a principal source of opposition money at the same time more corporate money flowed in from the right. In some ways, Walker’s radical-right approach presaged Trump.
But now, historians and political scientists might someday regard this election as an inflection point. If it is, we might recognize the outsized roles four individuals played in this historic restoration of Wisconsin politics.
The first is Democratic Gov. Tony Evers, whose 2018 election stopped the proverbial bleeding. He defeated Walker and has been a bulwark against GOP overreach and extremism at every step since.
Second is Janet Protasiewicz, a former Milwaukee County Circuit Court judge, whose 2023 election to the state’s highest court tipped control 4-3 control in favor of progressives and moderates, reversing 15 years of right-wing domination.
Third is Crawford, the Dane County Circuit Court judge whose effective campaign presented her as someone who is humble yet tough, a middle-class kid from Chippewa Falls who worked hard and did well. She struck just the right tone.
I loved how she interrupted a CBS News reporter this week who was trying to make a false equivalency between Musk’s money and her largest donors. No, Musk’s money dwarfed her largest contributors, she made clear.
Some national reporter described her as a “milquetoast” candidate.
Of course, that reporter would say the same thing about Democratic U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin and Evers. Perhaps “milquetoast” is just Washington-speak for “authentic” in Wisconsin.
Fourth on my list is Ben Wikler, the tireless leader of the Wisconsin Democratic Party. (Yes, the judicial race was technically nonpartisan, but c’mon.)
In an interview two weeks ago, I asked Wikler what election theme had received insufficient attention. That the outcome would be seen a referendum on Musk, he answered. He said this well before Musk’s much-ridiculed cheesehead-wearing appearance in Green Bay and his million-dollar giveaways.
Wikler told me: “Republicans are trying to figure out where the wind is blowing and right now Democrats look like they’re in disarray. Republicans are on the march, and Musk is, you know, promising boatloads of money left and right and the safest option seems like going along with whatever Elon Musk tells you to do.”
Referring to members of Congress, Wikler added, “But if it is a political disaster for them and threatens their reelection to go along with Musk and if Musk’s millions can’t bail them out in a contested election like this one, suddenly a lot of Republicans are going to be looking for political cover.”
I do not pretend to understand the complexities of running effective political operations, but Wikler’s knack for framing issues and keenly understanding the electorate in all corners of Wisconsin makes him stand out from other party leaders I have known.
Two months ago, Wikler finished second in a high-profile election to lead the Democratic National Committee. He did not miss a beat, directing his focus to the court race immediately afterward. He certainly made a difference.
Happily, within Wisconsin, we are inching back toward being the inclusive, compassionate, and even-handed state we once were. When you see that happening, you might think of and thank those four people.
And just maybe we can move beyond the politics of resentment.