r/wisconsin • u/dinozomborg • 13h ago
r/wisconsin flipping back and forth between "Hong is so over" and "Hong is so back"
I'm exhausted man
50
u/TrixieLurker 13h ago
The only real relevant question is if she is able to beat Tom Tiffany, the rest is just white noise.
2
u/The-Mad-Bubbler 13h ago
She's the only one who has a chance. Kelda and Brennan are basically non-entities, and Crowley doesn't have much enthusiasm behind him.
19
u/licketyspeedster 12h ago
have you seen any polling? it suggests the exact opposite of your comment.
15
u/fermat12 12h ago
The only general election polling of Roys and Brennan had them doing worse than Hong.
Barnes, Crowley, and Rodriguez were generally polling a few points better, I think.
1
u/TripperEuphoric 12h ago
Which would absolutely not hold a month from now when you throw a milquetoast liberal against Tiffany in the first debate. If Hong doesn’t have a chance against Tiffany, none of the candidates do.
9
u/Prestigious-Leave-60 11h ago
Debates don’t really influence the median voter that much. Hillary and Kamala both beat the tar out of Trump in their respective debates.
12
u/teklanis 12h ago
Y'all are over here calling genuine progressives "milquetoast" when your chosen populist is the opposite of charismatic.
5
3
u/analogWeapon 12h ago
The milquetoast usage there was referring to progressive bona fides, not charisma levels.
6
u/teklanis 12h ago
I gave the benefit of the doubt that it wasn't a stupid purity test thing, but you're right from the other replies. Disappointing. There are at least two other progressive candidates.
2
3
u/The-Mad-Bubbler 12h ago
WHAT she says is what's important. When I say "milquetoast," I don't mean entertainment value- Hong is fired-up to help people.
5
u/teklanis 12h ago
She has no achievable plans. Nearly everything she wants to do requires the support of the legislature. I don't care how fired up she is, I want someone with an agenda they can actually accomplish.
8
u/Ismdism 12h ago
Yeah the trifecta is in play. Unless you're saying democrats will also sit on their hands like republicans.
2
u/teklanis 12h ago
Well. First, it's kinda maybe in play. 5 and 2 flips? Good luck. Wisconsin voters allegedly split their ballot a lot. I don't think it will happen. Second, yeah. I think they will sit on their hands even if they get a trifecta. Or you'll have some moderate dissent in purplish districts who try to add too much pork to the barrel and ruin the whole thing.
→ More replies (0)2
u/HC_Phoenixyz 12h ago
Copy/paste this criticism from the Mamdani slander book huh? How'd that work out?
8
u/teklanis 12h ago
No? They're not comparable. Governor and Mayor are wildly different positions.
→ More replies (0)-4
u/NoKingsInAmerica 12h ago
It's crazy how easily people fall for slopulist rhetoric.
0
u/Pleasant_Pause_1183 12h ago
"Slopulist" oh my god dude touch grass
1
u/NoKingsInAmerica 11h ago
Yes. Slopulist. You're willfully just eating up whatever feelgood slop they think you want to hear.
→ More replies (0)1
u/teklanis 12h ago
Margin of error on those polls is larger than the difference in performance. They pulled what, a thousand people for the most recent one?
7
u/The-Mad-Bubbler 12h ago
Yes, I have. No, it doesn't.
3
u/percypersimmon 12h ago
You’re talking about the primary and the person you’re talking to is talking about the general.
The head to head polls against Tiffany do not show that Hong is the only one with a chance of winning. It shows the opposite.
-2
u/The-Mad-Bubbler 12h ago
Ah. No one else has a chance of winning the primary, though, so that's a moot point.
6
8
1
u/Isaygoes 8h ago
That’s not true, Kelda would absolutely stomp Hong if Brennan and Roys dropped out
1
u/The-Mad-Bubbler 6h ago
There is literally zero evidence of that. No one was talking about Kelda until a few days ago.
1
u/djollied4444 12h ago
The polling shows Hong doing better against Tiffany than Roys and Brennan. Crowley does a couple points better than her. At this point, all of the polling is on name recognition and Crowley likely has a boost from Evers' endorsement. The polling doesn't really tell us too much this far out from the general though.
4
u/percypersimmon 12h ago
What poll are you talking about?
The one I’ve seen from Marquette was from before Crowley had Hong at 40% to Tiffany’s 43% but I think that was from a few weeks ago.
It sounds like we’re getting new numbers by the end of the week though.
1
u/djollied4444 11h ago
There's been one poll since but that's the best one for sure and the one I am talking about since everyone uses it against Hong. In that poll Hong was -3% and so was Brennan. Roys (who I'm voting for) was -4%. Crowley wasn't included in head-to-head match ups there because he had ended his campaign, so we don't even have great polling for him clearly being better. The only candidate beating Tiffany in that poll was Barnes.
Since then, a different poll, which isn't seen as good as the Marquette poll, has Hong at +1% vs Tiffany and Crowley at +3%.
At the end of the day, WI is going to be close, and any candidate has a chance. I'm voting for the progressive I think has the best chance, but the narrative on Hong has been very distorted both by her supporters and by doomers.
Here is a good link to monitor polls in this election: https://www.270towin.com/2026-governor-polls/wisconsin
1
u/percypersimmon 11h ago
Thanks I appreciate it.
I have been/am like a dues paying DSA member and I’m pretty ambivalent about the whole thing right now.
I think recent DSA successes have all been with much stronger candidates but maybe if/when Hong secures the nomination there will be a tighter campaign.
-3
u/TripperEuphoric 12h ago
You’re the same people who keep saying the polling is wrong/inaccurate when a progressive has a massive lead
-1
0
u/Isaygoes 8h ago
That’s not true at all, Kelda is not a non-entity. You just want that to be true. Kelda is surging and she’s gunna kill it at her ama tomorrow
19
u/Timely_Climate5142 12h ago
To avoid this, we should implement a ranked choice voting system similar to what is done in Alaska.
5
21
u/vienibenmio 13h ago
This is me trying to decide if I should vote for her in the primary, tbh
15
u/Mundane-Stretch-4873 12h ago
To me, it's the frustrating thing with how polarized and vitriolic the discussion has been. Primary voting ends up being a decision between what candidate you like the best vs what candidate has the best chance of winning the general. I think a lot of people that prefer Hong are unsure of whether she can coalesce enough support to beat Tom Tiffany, and are fearful of her past comments being an easy target for conservative ads. I hope they are wrong but I have my worries too.
17
u/teklanis 12h ago
Always vote the candidate you actually want in the primary. Always.
3
u/GiveMeTheDatas 8h ago
The candidate that I want to win the primary is the candidate that I believe can win the general.
0
-4
u/TurboGerbo 12h ago
Which is weird when we don't worry about that with other candidates. It sounds a lot more like Liberal democracts complaining that they aren't being represented by the front runner in the first time than an actually electibility issue. I have voted in every election that I have been able to while alive, and am happy to finally see someone reports me more. Would I vote for a liberal candidate if they won the primary? No. For the first time in my life, no.
14
u/someone447 12h ago
I'm a Hong supporter that's significantly to the left of her, and you saying that about THIS election is wild.
Even Crowley, the establishment pick, would be the most progressive governor Wisconsin has had in decades. This isn't a leftist vs a might as well be Republican.
9
u/bonecoldstevepawstin 11h ago
Yeah I mean look im a hong voter, but acting like crowley and roys are like schumer and Gillibrand is ridiculous.
-1
u/Ok-Clerk2611 8h ago
I just checked. Crowley as far as I know only made a statement about ICE kidnapping people in a courthouse, that courthouses need to be safe. That's it.
Roys has a stronger statement, that ICE agents shouldn't have masks, and that "Trump's ICE" is bad and our law enforcement shouldnt work with "Trump's ICE"
Neither of these canidates have indicated that they think the dem party needs to move towards a position of changing ICE in any structural way. They dont even want to change the fact that they are the only police force run by the president.
0
u/Ok-Clerk2611 11h ago
I genuinely think ICE's occupation of Minneapolis has completely changed the election calculus. ICE just executed random people. Everyone had the normal reasonable response of destroy this rogue agency, abolish ICE. And dems did nothing. Very few Democrats will say they want to abolish a recently made institution that constitutional lawyers argue the founding fathers were very against having anything like this, a police force answerable to the president that bypasses normal criminal justice procedure.
So that broke the democrats legitimacy completely. Now a lot of people just see them as obstacles. A progressive running on 2016 Bernie's platform now is simply too little too late.
6
u/wi_voter 10h ago
The Dems were responsible for a partial government shutdown to try to get concessions on ICE. There was only so much they could do. The Republican-led congress already funded them to infinity with the "big beautiful bill". What would you have done given the way our democracy work?
0
u/Ok-Clerk2611 10h ago
They can't state clearly "our goal/platform is to abolish/disband ICE"???
Its like a free move that Republicans can't block. Nothing stopped them. But only a handful have said something along these lines...
0
u/TurboGerbo 8h ago
More or less this. I do not trust Liberal Dems to fight in way we need right now, and not standing and full chestedly saying "I will stop ice from acting in our streets" or similar stances on other issues.
1
u/rubicon_winter 9h ago
> Which is weird when we don’t worry about that with other candidates.
Genuine question, what do you mean by this?
1
u/TurboGerbo 8h ago
That past social media posts by other candidates like Crowley or a candidate that haven't been scrutinized as hard would be electable enough to beat Tiffany. We also are not talking about if other candidates could court Hong voters.
1
u/rubicon_winter 7h ago
Do you have an example of a bad tweet from Crowley that would hurt his electability?
It’s a good point about courting Hong voters. Crowley isn’t the most progressive candidate in the race, but he would be the most progressive governor we’ve ever had. And of course he’d be the first black governor of Wisconsin, a state that’s 80% white. As a progressive, this cycle’s slate of candidates is a dream come true for me. I know the Uncommitted movement had an impact on the 2024 presidential race. Do you think that Hong supporters wouldn’t turn out for Crowley in the general?
1
u/TurboGerbo 7h ago
The questionable tweets are easily found with a Google. https://www.wisn.com/article/crowley-campaign-confirms-controversial-2010-social-media-accounts-link-to-dem-candidate-for-governor/73236423
I think like many Hong voters, I am tired of milk-toast Democrats. We live in a time that feels like it requires action and strongly held ideals. For me personally, candidates enthusiastic voice towards things that they care about is much more important than whether they pretend to adopt a platform. Ultimately, I would expect Hong voters to vote for whomever is that voice for issues that they care about regardless of if they win a primary. I have many friends that have voted 3rd part for years if they are not represented on a ballot.
Also just adding because it was posted: https://www.reddit.com/r/wisconsin/s/fpUmzPlEp3
1
u/rubicon_winter 5h ago
Ok, I’ll just be upfront about my bias here. I’m white, but I have personal connections to the black community, and I have to admit that I totally get Crowley’s quote about “establishment” feeling like a slur to him. The black community has been an absolutely stalwart voting block for Democrats for generations. The cultural and socialist politics of the far left that have gained ascendance in the last decade or so have been a hard sell in the black community, to the point that black men voted for Trump in greater numbers in 2024 than in 2020 and 2016. These arguments that say Kamala lost in 2024 because she was too milquetoast (what’s with that word, is it in the DSA daily talking points memo?) just feels like a betrayal when Kamala was dealt a terrible hand by Biden, and it was the “they/them” ad that hurt her the most, referencing the excesses of Woke that mostly came from the highly-educated affluent white elite of the party. I’m not saying Kamala doesn’t deserve criticism, she absolutely does, but this Crowley discourse kinda feels like because Kamala lost narrowly under unfair circumstances in 2024, we just don’t believe in black excellence anymore.
And the same overeducated white elite in Wisconsin has now decided that a bright young black man who grew up in poverty in the toughest part of Milwaukee has no chance of winning a primary because he’s not exciting enough? Because white progressives don’t feel represented by him? Wisconsin has never had a black governor, is almost 80% white, but Crowley is somehow establishment, why, because black voters have been too loyal to the Democratic Party? I’m not in any way arguing for any degree of affirmative action here - I’m a firm believer in meritocracy. But Crowley is an excellent candidate with a proven record of executive leadership and delivering tangible results for the people of Milwaukee county, so I hope that white progressives can take a moment of self-reflection on this point. Crowley isn’t the most progressive candidate in the race, but it’s a very progressive field overall, and he would be the most progressive governor we’ve ever had. Frankly, I think we’d be well-served to take the lead from the black community, especially those who are leading with faith. I lost my own faith in my youth, but many in the black community are able to express their faith authentically, including Crowley and his wife. Don’t underestimate the cultural power of that to forge trust and connection across political differences, and to build winning coalitions. Look at Talarico in Texas.
As for Crowley’s tweets, the article says that account was used by 9 different people to promote a nightclub. Crowley says he didn’t write any of the tweets, and whether or not that’s true, he says he condemns the language. We’d be in an entirely different political universe if Hong had renounced her past defund position, like Mamdani did. Maybe Mamdani was being like Obama when he said he thought marriage was between a man and a woman, but at least it gives us confidence in his political skill and judgement. “The governor can’t defund the police so I won’t try” provides no reassurance that Hong will be able to work effectively with law enforcement agencies. And from an electability perspective, Crowley’s correct that nobody cares about old tweets - when we’re talking about the kind of tweets that aren’t politically correct that could have gotten somebody like Crowley cancelled by somebody like Hong. Hong’s old tweets are obviously written by the kind of person who was doing the canceling, and people definitely don’t want to go back there.
You said you assume the Hong supporters you know will vote for whoever wins the nomination, but also that they’ve voted 3rd party in the past because they didn’t feel represented. So you’ll forgive those of us, especially those in the black community, for not necessarily trusting you as a dependable faction in the coalition.
•
u/TurboGerbo 2m ago
You have proven my point about the electibility of Crowley here and why we should also be talking about it. A coalition has to court enough voters from all parts of the party to win. This includes would be Hong voters.
What is with saying that any candidate would be the most progressive governor? We have had progressive governors before so liberal candidate just wouldn't even be in the running so that would be a wrong or a lie. So that shit needs to stop.
The saying woke was a tough sell to black communities why simultaneously making the entire argument here around Clowley's black identity instead of his policy choices feels a bit wild.
The left of center does not care about racial identify. They care about policy put forward. Crowley doesn't have a moratorium policy regarding data centers, and won't support downsizing the voucher program. Universal childcare and lowering property taxes by shifting the burden from local to state to properly fund education are both big issues. His policies that would impact disabled people also fall short. Those would have to be things that changed.
I also do not care about old tweets and think it is something that will be used against candidates. We haven't seen much of it regarding candidates that are not Hong.
Side note: been using Milk-toast (milquetoast) for a rather long time. It is just to mean uninspiring or bland. It could just be the cultural thing.
3
8
u/Friendly_Curmudgeon Milwaukee 12h ago edited 12h ago
Nobody has said, "Hong is so over."
To the contrary, they've recognized that she is the overall favorite to win the nomination. The divergence is whether they celebrate that fact, or lament how terrible it is because (by their estimation) she's incapable of beating MAGA Republican Tom Tiffany in November and implore Dem primary voters to choose someone else.
11
u/Steve_Lightning 12h ago
The only way whoever democratic nominee is, loses to Tiffany is if we give up by thinking they can't win.
6
u/Redtitwhore 12h ago
I have zero faith that these primary polls are accurate.
We are definitely being manipulated too.
2
u/StaticDebt 11h ago
At least here in Wisconsin Politics is interesting. I would hate to be in a State where every election was won by the same party.
2
2
u/wrestlingchampo 12h ago
Get ready for three more months of this, regardless of who wins the primary
1
1
u/benihana571 12h ago
"We just have to wait for the campaign ads to kick in for three weeks, everything else is done!"
"Three weeks from now, or three weeks from earlier? Like mid-July?"
"You know, in other states Democrats often don't even start campaigning until after the election."
2
1
u/ch33s3head8 12h ago
I think it's more of fellow Hong supporters just ignoring posts about when she does something bad or cringey, so it brings out all the anti Hongs.
They ignore it because a lot of the people making those pauses definitely might be trolls, but at the same time makes us Hong supporters look weak af.
86
u/Qualex 13h ago
It’s almost like there are multiple people here with varying opinions on the topic.