Think they all gave up after last year.
Can this lead to the gerrymandering of Wisconsin to be overturned?
612
Flooding_Puddle3 days ago
+405
The maps have already been redrawn. This race was to further expand the democratic state Supreme Court majority, theyve had a majority for a few years now
405
Spam_Hand3 days ago
+166
And I believe an election next year that would bring the court to 6-1 with another liberal win...
166
Atalung3 days ago
+206
I was fairly certain you were wrong (I had read 2030 was the next one) but Ziegler is retiring and is one of the two conservatives left. To go from 4-3 conservative to 6-1 liberal in 4 years would be wild
206
RockPaperOwFire3 days ago
+153
Well, when republican judges have made it clear they don’t support law or precedent, but rather what the president and evangelicals want… this is what happens when the actual majority finally wakes the f*** up.
153
Spam_Hand3 days ago
+62
Also when a major part of your philosophy is "I cheered when they overturned Roe v Wade" you probably suck as a human.
62
ByRWBadger3 days ago
+77
My new philosophy in life is Scorched Earth Anti-Republican so this is great news
77
apoca1ypse123 days ago
+22
we are watching the downfall of the republican party in real time.
Edit: thank you to all of replies that balances out my comment. TLDR: vote your asses off to make sure that this downfall happens.
22
Atalung3 days ago
+77
Look man, I hope you're right but I was alive in 2008 and heard the same predictions then. Even if maga crumbles post trump (and I believe it will) the gop will still exist. America will always have a home for billionaires and their weird bootlickers
77
GoldandBlue3 days ago
+30
Yup. Remember the autopsy? Their own research showed they lost because they were viewed as the racist old white man party, and unless they changed, the GOP would be dead in a decade.
What they do? They doubled down on the racism and bigotry and here we are.
30
whomad12153 days ago
+21
they got a bunch of billionaires to buy up all the legacy media companies
that went a long way to keeping them in power
21
bobandgeorge3 days ago
+10
A Trump endorsed candidate just won in Georgia replacing MTG's vacated seat. She won in 2024 with ~65% of the vote while Fuller won with ~55%.
It's still there but it might not be as strong.
10
TableSignificant3413 days ago
+3
There's a definite trend. A 20pt swing to a 10pt swing toward democrat is roughly what we've seen in similiar deep deep red districts recently.
3
emaw633 days ago
+2
There's a pendulum in politics that always swings back and forth. Been that way since the beginning
2
hexcraft-nikk3 days ago
+2
This feels much different. Bush failures and Iraq war lies were pretty obscures from the general public, and on the propaganda front we got "wins" with sadam and bin laden dead. The financial crisis was also positioned as a problem of greedy individuals and not the system at large. They properly squashed the Wall Street protests as well.
But now? They've lost the information war for younger generations. The right wing youths being indoctrinated by the manosphere and Rogan are being completely rejected by their peers socially. They weren't able to buy up legacy media and lock up the algorithms fast enough before everyone saw Israel and Epstein. That's a Pandora's box that the Republicans can't put back in. The blue wave is likely to be stronger than most polls have shown and it's largely due to the under 30 voting block.
2
esunei3 days ago
+17
I wish I had this optimism.
Because going by what's happened before, the country will completely forget the horrible nature of the Republican party in four years time and begin voting them back in during midterms. The left will be busy infighting as always. The right will play up concerns about fiscal responsibility now that the debt is higher than ever, pretending that they're the party to deliver on that despite the last several decades.
I mean republicans won handily on the "Destroy America" platform. Their base isn't going anywhere, especially when after Trump they can pretend they never voted for him anyways.
17
GeorgeLichen3 days ago
+2
A bird flu will make egg prices go up for a month or two. The media will blame the democratic president and their poll numbers won't recover, leading to a republican landslide in 2032 and another national overall slip to the right.
Then that republican president will decapitate a baby on live TV while nuking Portugal for some random personal reason and maaaaybe drop 5 points or so in the polls.
The rules are just different for the left and right with the general public. Republicans get the *boys will be boys* treatment, democrats get the belt for a B+
2
sSTtssSTts3 days ago
+7
Maybe the Trump version of it but there'll still be a GOP of some form and there'll still be at least a significant minority of GOP voters for decades at a minimum.
Those people aren't going to disappear just because Trump dies or gives up on the job. They'll instantly memory hole all that and then circle around the next "great leader" for tribal reasons.
Look at how they handled W Bush. They memory holed him so hard he might as well not exist anymore for Repubs!! You'll see a version of that all over again after a brief period of wailing and gnashing of teeth.
Also being in obvious decline doesn't mean they don't still have enough power to screw things up for the rest of us. If he goes hard on voter suppression with his brown shirt ICE army things can absolutely still go to shit.
There are also still the long term structural advantages the Repubs have in the Senate to consider. They're nearly guaranteed to win control of the Senate every time due to the amount of states they control even if the amount of people in those states is a minority!
On top of that there have been large population shifts over the last few years in the US and the 2030 Census is going to cause some large changes to how the Electoral Votes are distributed on a state by state basis.
https://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2026/Items/Mar30-9.html
tl&dr is after the population shifts are accounted for Dem's could still lose (only 260 EV's, they need 270 to win) if they win all the states they normally can get right now for presidential races.
7
Attainted3 days ago
+3
lol I remember saying this in spring 2016.
3
The_Space_Jamke3 days ago
+3
Hate to be the pessimist here, but I don't see this happening unless hundreds of criminals in the child rapist party get life sentences for all they did bare minimum.
3
mrbasedballed3 days ago
+1
American media doesn't seem to think so.
1
sillypotatoes5643 days ago
+6
Ziegler's term ends in 2027.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisconsin_Supreme_Court?wprov=sfti1#Current_justices
6
leg_day3 days ago
+3
The power of term limits.
Repeat it often, repeat it wide.
3
CorrosionImplosion3 days ago
+23
And we thankfully have a left leaning court until at least 2030. This is huge for us in Wisconsin.
23
stuipd3 days ago
+2
Federal congressional maps have not been redrawn.
2
wabiguan3 days ago
+1
gerrymandering influences state wide elections, albeit indirectly. lowering a voter’s general confidence that their vote matters depresses turnout, and lower turnout favors conservatives.
1
kswissreject3 days ago
+49
They already un gerrymandered the state legislature (even tho they could have gone farther) but ya the federal delegation there badly needs it too, was hoping for this cycle but seems like wouldn’t happen till 2028. This election doesn’t make much difference in that since they already had a majority.
49
kahn_noble3 days ago
+10
But a super majority is nice, and gives Dems in tough seats for future races flexibility
10
RykerFuchs3 days ago
+2
I don’t think so, just the other day I heard a an anti-abortion commercial about how if you voted for this guy there would be live abortions in the streets.
Or at least that’s my take away from the rhetoric bullshit commercials.
2
Murba3 days ago
+1
He pretty much thought he was the next Karl Rove after ‘24 and the blowout from the court race afterward pretty much embarrassed him and took out all the wind behind his sails
1
DarthTechnicus3 days ago
+1
Last year's state supreme court race was for a seat held by a liberal judge with liberals holding a 4-3 majority going into it. That's why last year's election was so polarizing and the financial expenditure so outrageous. This year's election was for a seat held by a conservative judge, so conservatives had no way to regain the majority. Had last year's election gone differently, this years would've like broken new election spending records.
1
Fiddy-Scent3 days ago
+1
Damage has already been done
1
RockinRanger3 days ago
+75
He only cared last year because there was a chance to flip court for conservatives while Tesla is suing the state to overturn the law that doesn't let the company run their own dealerships there.
75
redpoemage3 days ago
+15
People should remember this when bad actors trying to suppress the vote (and the people that fall for them) bring up the idea that Elon somehow magically rigged the election in 2024. Why do it then and not do it again when he had money on the line again?
Republicans use all kinds of dirty tricks, but they can't straight up control the vote. That's why they try so hard to keep people from voting.
15
punkasstubabitch3 days ago
+16
but I made $100 doing it. This year I voted with the satisfaction that I was making sure Republicans know I still have a giant middle finger to put in their face, and we're not going anywhere
16
RobutNotRobot3 days ago
+17
None. They got bored after the court wasn't in the balance.
17
McButtsButtbag3 days ago
+4
Not enough to matter
4
Gostaverling3 days ago
+1
Don’t know if he paid anything but I saw lots of ads for the conservative judge and none for Taylor.
1
Wazootyman133 days ago
+1
No matter what, a negligible amount
1
insomniaczombiex3 days ago
+646
Woohoo!
Sometimes this state isn’t that bad.
646
MarleysGhost20243 days ago
+303
You guys are doing great. But could you do all of us a huge favor and vote out RON F****** JOHNSON? We despise that a******!
303
Sure_Marcia3 days ago
+54
F*** Ron Johnson
54
HotHamNRolls3 days ago
+12
r/frj
12
FlarkingSmoo3 days ago
+115
Trust me there's no way you hate him more than we do. I mean, some of us. He's up in 28 so hopefully if we still have real elections we can ditch him finally.
115
janethefish3 days ago
+37
I want a Senator that isn't trying to help the plague.
37
largelyinaccurate3 days ago
+1
Well, he went up against Trump yesterday on Iran so he might be trying to salvage his upcoming election.
1
Inglorious1863 days ago
+28
Obligatory f*** Ron Johnson
28
EQBallzz3 days ago
+13
Fun fact: if you google "RON F****** JOHNSON" the search engine knows the EXACTLY correct "RON F****** JOHNSON" and one of the top search results is "Ron Johnson is such a f****** scumbag".
13
deaglebingo3 days ago
+2
he married into it. just like walker.
*but it's cool bc he only participated in the fake electors scheme for "a few minutes"... and admitted that on tv*
2
WeaponsGrdStupid3 days ago
+3
Working on it.
3
Fratil3 days ago
+5
So do we, but now we're probably going to take the same guy who failed to win that election and let him fail to win the governor's race as well. Yay establishment democrats.
5
NobodysLoss13 days ago
+16
God I hope not. Hong for governor!
16
neosithlord3 days ago
+2
Oh the Wisconsin senator from Florida! Ya I’ll do what I can.
2
AbbeyRoadMoonwalk3 days ago
+17
*high five*
17
deaglebingo3 days ago
+1
hell yeah.
1
WeaponsGrdStupid3 days ago
+7
Conservative lawmakers in Wisconsin have been put on notice.
7
deaglebingo3 days ago
+2
omg are they going down. they really have no clue yet.
2
animal_chin93 days ago
+9
I voted for her today and so did my friend. :)
9
CelestialFury3 days ago
+8
"FTP" and all, but great job Wisconsinites! Keep up the good work.
8
Wazootyman133 days ago
+2
And then we're like "Hey! Let's elect Ron Johnson! And Scott Walker!!"
2
insomniaczombiex3 days ago
+1
In my defense, I moved here after that happened…
1
Wazootyman133 days ago
+2
And I left there before that happened!
I remember being depressed on election night 2016 and then seeing on top of that, Feingold had somehow lost to a piece of shit
2
tepkel3 days ago
+1
Ziegler's seat is up next year. So at worst it maintains 5-2 until 2028. At best improves to 6-1.
1
TwixOps3 days ago
+1
I don't know why we allow literal facists (republiKKKans) to hold office in the first place.
1
insomniaczombiex3 days ago
+1
Because a lot of fascist bootlickers support them.
1
TwixOps3 days ago
+2
Facism is literally illegal, so at least they won't be able to vote in the future
2
insomniaczombiex3 days ago
+1
I appreciate your optimism.
1
calamititties3 days ago
+1
Y’all are something to aspire to
-Ohio
1
FortNightsAtPeelys3 days ago
-3
yet somehow still voted trump.
-3
jord8393 days ago
+13
By less than 1 percent and less than 20k votes both times.
Go bother the Michiganders, they voted for him by a larger margin both times. And they produced Kid rock.
13
Spam_Hand3 days ago
+447
Excellent, excellent news. WI is taking it's time through the democratic process to fix the Scott Walker damage, but year by year more progress is made!
And this time, we know the other side always acts in bad faith, so if we get enough momentum back, let's close all those loopholes and stop it from happening again!
447
sardonicmarvel3 days ago
+17
FSW, always and forever. FSW so much!
17
livinglavidajudoka3 days ago
+4
I'm confused, do you mean FTP?
4
AwesomeAsian3 days ago
+7
/r/NFCNorthMemeWar is leaking
7
Neriya3 days ago
+5
> And this time, we know the other side always acts in bad faith, so if we get enough momentum back, let's close all those loopholes and stop it from happening again!
I love your optimism.
5
cguess3 days ago
+9
In Wisconsin it's actually working.
9
GhostDoggoes3 days ago
+79
Crazy how suddenly the country is leaning deeper into blue than ever before because of one group lead by one pedo war criminal.
79
AnglerJared3 days ago
+13
He wished to make America great again on a cursed monkey paw, and we’re all paying for it now, benefitting long-term.
13
throwmamadownthewell3 days ago
+15
> benefitting long-term
I'll believe it when I see it. There are so many time bombs that have been set up, like the DOGE guts, CDC and NIH shit.
15
imaloony83 days ago
+3
Agreed. The damage this administration has done will take generations to fix. The USAID cuts, ICE raids and deportations, all this shit with RFK in HHS, Roe v Wade, the direct attacks on the election systems, destroying our relationships abroad, selling pardons to rich criminals, all the shit you mentioned, and more.
I'm optimistic about the pushback and I really hope we come back from this, but the damage we're dealing with cannot be overstated.
3
AnglerJared3 days ago
+2
Yeah, well, I was trying to be optimistic…
2
Voodoocookie3 days ago
+151
Get the f out and keep voting! Don't assume you're winning from just some good news. It needs to be overwhelming.
151
AwesomeChihuahua19723 days ago
+38
Polls closed an hour and a half ago
38
marx2k3 days ago
+29
It wasn't even close
29
langsamlourd3 days ago
+16
Lmao it was like 60 to 40 percent. Great to see
16
ccoastie3 days ago
+186
I find it funny that the USA votes in judges by which party they are
186
Future_Armadillo64103 days ago
+195
Technically it’s a nonpartisan race. She was endorsed by all the left leaning orgs
195
ccoastie3 days ago
+34
But it's weird there even is a vote for judges .this is not common
34
CelestialFury3 days ago
+44
The United States is the only country where judicial elections are widespread, especially at the state and local levels.
It's certainly a double-edged sword as it allows us to vote out bad judges, but also, people can keep electing bad judges too. Definitely a mixed system. However, I do not trust Republicans to appoint good judges anymore so it's actually a good thing for us at the moment.
44
Mr_Knutsen3 days ago
+1
Bad judges should get thrown out, when reviewing their cases on a objective base.
1
PirateSanta_13 days ago
+37
Not voting for judges is how you get Supreme Court that has been majority republican since 1970. The process for appointing judges get abused by the party in power who appoint people who will back them letting them win legal cases to help them then break other systems in their favor.
I get the idea of judges being nonpartisan or having independent committees but whatever system you set up is open to corruption and control. I'd rather the people get a direct say in who holds power over them.
37
Chief_White_Halfoat3 days ago
+6
In Canada it has worked quite well. Conservatives have appointed judges that regularly side against them.
6
Mimicov3 days ago
+1
How long will it be before they stop putting in judges that disagree with them? Once that happens then you'll get a court similar to the US Supreme court and with little ways to fix it.
1
Cheese20093 days ago
-14
I don’t think you understand that in most other western countries, the judges are actually nonpartisan. Just because the US is too much of a mess to figure its shit out doesn’t mean that the rest of the world can’t either.
-14
calm_down_meow3 days ago
+22
Ah these mystical countries that are immune to partisanship and populism.
22
Chief_White_Halfoat3 days ago
+5
In Canada the judges appointed by conservative Stephen Harper frequently sided against him. Canadians broadly don't have many issues with our Supreme Court, you rarely hear about them and they don't make a lot of news because they are on the whole quite reasonable. There's no Alito or Thomas.
5
joshred3 days ago
+4
America's federal judges are also appointed.
4
PrecedentialAssassin3 days ago
+3
Sure thing Jan
3
ClickClick_Boom3 days ago
+3
America is allowed to do things differently than the rest of the world. Hope this helps you understand.
3
SubstantialGoat9123 days ago
+5
>America is allowed to do things differently
Oh ain’t that the truth. Boy is the rest of the world learning that the hard way.
5
carti_palace3 days ago
+3
We should be welcoming ideas from the rest of the world not being defensive. Clearly what’s happening here isn’t f****** working lol
3
ccoastie3 days ago
-3
And I'm allow to laugh .I hope that helps
-3
SweetNeo853 days ago
-3
That doesn't make it a good idea. You're *allowed* to eat nothing but marshmallows if you want to.
-3
kevinyeaux3 days ago
+1
As an American, I’ve often argued that we have way too many elected positions. I’ve voted on ballots with 18-20 different positions on it, the vast majority of which I had no idea who these people were, and I worked in local politics.
It generally had good intentions, to try and take the ability to appoint these positions away from corrupt elected officials in the late 1800s/early 1900s. But I definitely think we’d be better served by moving the majority of these local positions back to appointed positions, serving a single elected city or local council.
1
jrblockquote3 days ago
+11
Depends on the state. We don't vote for judges in Connecticut. They are appointed.
11
ezirb73 days ago
+37
The race is officially nonpartisan. At this point, I'm not sure how you would have an election for a justice with enough experience on the bench to know that they're qualified without some idea of their political lean based on rulings they've issued.
37
ccoastie3 days ago
-10
There should not be elections for judges
-10
Apart_Dot_10573 days ago
+41
This is specifically to dissuade institutional power accumulation via appointments. You know, like the thing that destroyed America’s Supreme Court, rather than this state Supreme Court? Not that the electorate doesn’t love f****** it up.
41
NYCinPGH3 days ago
+13
And yet look at how well appointed judges have worked out (points at SCOTUS)
13
Prince_Uncharming3 days ago
+25
This isn’t exclusive to the USA. People running for office tend to either affiliate with or are backed by a Party or coalition of parties. Even “independent” or non-affiliated candidates are backed by or receive endorsements from political parties, and people who affiliate with those parties simply vote for who they back
25
djheart3 days ago
+2
Where else in the world are judges elected ?
2
oath2order3 days ago
+9
Bolivia, Switzerland, Japan (retention elections)
https://judiciariesworldwide.fjc.gov/judicial-selection
9
ccoastie3 days ago
I don't know of any other countries that vote for judges
0
oath2order3 days ago
+20
Bolivia, Switzerland, Japan (retention elections)
https://judiciariesworldwide.fjc.gov/judicial-selection
20
powercow3 days ago
+10
[mexico votes for them all.. even the supreme court.](https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-09-11/mexico-becomes-first-country-to-approve-election-of-judges/104339920)
started a couple years ago.
10
KaesekopfNW3 days ago
+13
Every state does it differently. Some use an appointment process and don't use elections at all. And to be clear, this is officially non-partisan. The judges in this Wisconsin race are not formally affiliated with political parties, but it's of course obvious which is liberal and and which is conservative.
13
ccoastie3 days ago
+1
Voting for judges is just strange
1
KaesekopfNW3 days ago
+7
I don't disagree. I'm not a big fan of it. I think the Missouri Plan is a good compromise, though. A nonpartisan commission picks a handful of potential judges, the governor appoints one, and the voters decide in a year if they want to keep that person (this is non-competitive - just a simple yes or no). If voters reject the judge, the process starts over, and if they accept the judge, they can serve out their full term, which is often 10+ years.
7
jerrymandias3 days ago
+4
It wasn't always that way. It's recent blowback resulting from a long series of absolute dogshit politically-motivated Supreme Court opinions in the past few decades. The Roberts Court has set this country back 70 years, and voters are now taking it upon themselves to try and rebalance the scales.
4
kermitsio3 days ago
+6
They don’t. All judges are technically independent. That’s why the title says “democrat-backed”. Judges, like everyone else, have biases.
6
powercow3 days ago
+2
some states do, some states it's like the federal system, where the governor appoints, with state senate approval. A lot of states think electing judges leads to them being beholden to their donors and not ruling fairly.. but then again, letting governors appoint, well you get like you do in florida with basically the entire court dominated by desantis appointees who rubber stamp everything he does.
Personally i prefer them to be voted by the judiciary itself(could be judicial nominees with senate approval, still better than our system). You are more likely to get older centrists who arent bound to corporate donors, or the head of the states executive branch.
2
ccoastie3 days ago
+1
The problem with voting in USA it is such a low turn out .
1
risingsuncoc3 days ago
+5
Yeah, it’s one of the many flaws in the US political system
5
Spazicon3 days ago
+1
Once upon a time, we were less polarized. Now, everything is seen through a partisan lens.
1
ccoastie3 days ago
+1
It's why it should be 100% independent of voters or party in power but USA is probably to far gone to have a true independent board now a days
1
Spazicon3 days ago
+7
Yeah, there’s no such thing as “independent” here. A relic of the past.
7
ccoastie3 days ago
In the ussa I agree
0
gideon5133 days ago
+1
You should probably specify the state because that’s not every state
1
certciv3 days ago
+1
I live in California. While there are judicial candidates we choose to fill vacancies on the bench, we also vote to keep judges previously appointed by elected officials. I've voted for judges appointed by just about every California governor in the last 50 years, both Republican and Democrat. I've generally been pleasantly surprised by the quality of judges on the ballot in terms of qualifications and competency, and the overwhelming majority with no partisan affiliation at all. I generally vote against judicial candidates with previous party affiliation, regardless of the party.
One of the most damaging things happening in American politics is the massive influx of partisan judges, most of them Republican appointments, flooding the judiciary. I can't speak for other states, but in California I have not seen that happening.
1
Incunebulum3 days ago
+1
We also vote for Coroner.
1
ccoastie3 days ago
+1
Haha I remember seeing one for a vote for head of waste in a local area and I thought that was weird
1
imaloony83 days ago
+1
This shouldn't be the case, but welcome to the current state of the judicial system. Doesn't matter if you're good at your job, just what side of the aisle you sit on.
My dad is intimately familiar with our local judicial system because of the line of work he used to be in. When primary races for the county prosecutor came up, he urged me and others to get out and vote because there was exactly one good candidate in the primaries between both sides. I did go out and vote and encouraged my friends to as well, but the guy still lost.
Come election day and my dad (who isn't a registered Democrat but generally votes liberal and hates the GOP) said that between the two options, the Republican was probably better, but that both candidates were lousy choices. Neither of them had any experience as a prosecutor, and the guy who was passed up in the primaries was extremely experienced.
1
JammmJam3 days ago
-1
I find it funny you’re wrong
-1
ccoastie3 days ago
+2
Most countries don't vote for judges. Plus USA such a low voter turn out that it's easier for one side to get it's voter out in certin areas
2
claisen333 days ago
+14
Yahoo! or wahoo! I don’t know which is more appropriate.
14
GrigoriTheDragon3 days ago
+3
I voted for her today, so great to hear.
3
Both_Lychee_17083 days ago
+5
Gee, what does Wisconsin have against the GOP? (;
5
Snerkbot70003 days ago
+4
Her campaign slogan: "Barrels are over-rated".
4
CarolynRae3 days ago
+2
I really hope we can get Francesca Hong into office.
2
Informal_Jicama_67083 days ago
+1
I thought that a dem was retiring, so isn’t the majority still 4-3?
1
DarthTechnicus3 days ago
+3
No, this is for the seat being vacated by Rebecca Bradley, a h******* conservative justice who initially announced she would seek re-election in April of last year, but reversed that in August of 2025.
New majority is 5-2 following this election once Chris Taylor is sworn in.
3
Informal_Jicama_67083 days ago
+1
Ah, thanks for the clarification.
1
deaglebingo3 days ago
+1
***I Voted!***
***freedom is real and it's coming back to a state near you!***
1
Cynical_Classicist3 days ago
+1
The Wisconsin supreme Court races have been some good news.
1
Delicious-Science5513 days ago
+1
My wife and O voted for this today.
1
Domodude173 days ago
+1
Wish we could be getting this in Ohio!
1
SmellsofGooseberries3 days ago
+1
It is so beautiful watching the Wisconsin GOP shrivel up and surrender to such a degree. There’s a very real chance in 2027 that the state is going to go from a 4-3 conservative majority that ruled the state like it was Florida to a 6-1 liberal majority in just a few years.
1
imaloony83 days ago
+1
20 point victory. Woof. Here's hoping this (along with the other recent elections) is a sign of things to come across the country.
1
d3k3d3 days ago
+1
You should have seen the BS they were pulling at polling places. What street do you live on? What street? It's on my driver's license I just handed you, beneath my name that the three of you asked me three times. Also you both over here asked me how to spell it like I'm not me and I'm gonna screw up my name.
1
cctmsp133 days ago
+1
They're required to ask, because the address on the drivers license isn't always accurate.
151 Comments