In the midst of a “civil war” between progressives and moderates in the Democratic Party, Wisconsin’s gubernatorial primary has emerged as one of the most consequential battlegrounds.
For months, it seemed to be a three-way race between Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez, state Rep. Francesca Hong and former Lt. Gov. and 2022 U.S. Senate Candidate Mandela Barnes. That was, until Rodriguez’s campaign imploded due to financial issues that led to the firing of her long-time campaign manager and the revelation that she was essentially out of money.
The day after Rodriguez suspended her campaign, Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley announced he would rejoin the race with the endorsement support of Gov. Tony Evers, just ten days after Crowley suspended his initial bid.
Despite his support for a competitive primary and conviction to neutrality, Evers has decided to intervene and play kingmaker. The goal of his endorsement is plain to see: consolidate opposition to Hong.
Once believed to be a long-shot candidate, Hong has led in nearly every poll this year, including Marquette Law School’s most recent poll on July 22, where she was 11 points ahead of the second-place candidate. She also leads the Democratic field in the number of individual donors to her campaign.
At this point in the race, Hong is the one to beat.
Yet the criticism remains the same: She is too progressive to win Wisconsin.
While this idea has dominated commentary on Hong’s campaign, that argument has become the Democratic Party’s favorite self-fulfilling prophecy.
For decades, party leaders have warned that progressive candidates are “unelectable”, only to intervene before voters ever have the opportunity to prove otherwise. The result is a political culture where instilling fear in the base stifles energetic, people-driven progressive campaigns to make way for status quo moderate Democrats.
Despite what moderates would like you to believe, progressives can win in Wisconsin.
In her convention speech, Hong references Bob La Follette, whom she says at the time was considered “unreasonable, impractical and unelectable.” Under La Follette, Wisconsin was the birthplace of progressivism, once called a “laboratory of democracy,” trailblazing policies such as direct primary elections, workers' compensation, and progressive taxation.
La Follette’s legacy alone does not prove that progressives can win in Wisconsin, but it weakens the argument that Wisconsinites will reject bold politics. Wisconsin did not import this ideology from somewhere like San Francisco or Brooklyn. We invented it.
Wisconsin’s history of electing progressives isn’t isolated to a governor over 100 years ago. Russ Feingold, one of the fiercest progressives in the Senate for decades, was a champion for Wisconsin, serving three terms from 1993-2011. Feingold, similar to Hong, ran on a platform of economic populism, taking on corporations and fighting for the working class.
Electability is not an elusive quality that all moderates have and progressives lack. It is the ability to build support, raise money, mobilize volunteers and communicate an inspiring vision for the future. By those metrics, Hong is the clear winner.
To say that Crowley is the more “electable” candidate is a complete contradiction in itself. The reality is, Crowley already lost. He dropped out of the primary. He couldn’t build the momentum to pull ahead in the crowded field of Democratic contenders. It wasn’t until Evers raised him from the dead that he was viewed as a viable candidate.
This is not to say that Crowley is a bad candidate or a bad leader. Crowley has done amazing work in Milwaukee County to make housing affordable, create jobs and cut carbon emissions, among a myriad of other policy accomplishments. In terms of executive experience, Crowley is perhaps the most qualified candidate in the field. However, Crowley has not shown that he can inspire a movement in the way that Hong does.
What Democrats want right now is change. They want someone willing to fight for them rather than uphold the status quo. They want a candidate beholden to the people rather than to corporations and wealthy donors. They want someone who imagines a better future rather than toils in the misery the party currently enjoys.
Democrats are on the losing team, so it’s time to change playbooks.
Hong offers what Democrats need most in this moment: hope. She envisions a Wisconsin where no child goes hungry at school, no parent has to choose between child care and rent, and no worker has to sacrifice a paycheck to care for their newborn or sick parent. She envisions a Wisconsin where public schools are fully funded, where health care is affordable and where all workers can fight for higher wages and better conditions. She envisions a future determined by the people of Wisconsin, not the greed of the few.
The Democratic Party is on the precipice of a new era. Voters are frustrated with failed promises and ineffective strategies. It is time to think bigger than what we believe is politically feasible and begin “fighting like hell” for what people actually need. Democrats cannot seek to inspire people through tweaking the status quo or campaigning solely on fear of Republicans.
In the August primary, Wisconsin Democrats face a choice much larger than any one candidate. They can retreat to the familiar politics of caution or embrace the state’s history of bold change.
We cannot continue to say that progressives are unelectable if we never let them try.
Brady Ahler is an Opinion Editor. He is a junior studying Political Science and Economics. Do you agree that Democrats need to allow for progressives to succeed? Send all comments to opinion@dailycardinal.com
