Democrats Import Illinois Senator as Convention Keynote

Wisconsin Democrats are turning to a U.S. Senator from Illinois to highlight their party’s annual convention in June. From the AP:

U.S. Sen. Tammy Duckworth, of Illinois, will be the keynote speaker at the Wisconsin Democratic Party convention in June.

The state party on Thursday announced Duckworth as the headliner for the first day of its meeting Friday, June 2. The annual gathering bringing together state office holders, party activists and others is in Middleton, just outside of Madison.

The meeting comes as the Democratic Party prepares to defend the seat of U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin next year and find a challenger for Republican Gov. Scott Walker. Numerous Democrats have said they will not take him on, while others are still mulling whether to get in the race.

The AP report mentions Democratic Senator Tammy Baldwin, who would seem to be the obvious choice to serve as the keynote speaker. That, in part, is because the Democrats don’t yet have a candidate for governor to put front-and-center.

But why is Baldwin taking a lower-profile role? Is she afraid of reminding everyone that she’s the far-left Democrats’ superhero in a state that’s been consistently rejecting Democrats? Considering several of her recent initiatives, including advertising that President Trump supports her “buy America” plan, as well as a politically motivated move to de-list the Grey Wolf, that’s not an unreasonable guess.

In any case, importing a senator from a neighboring state to highlight a convention is a loud statement about how little talent the party has in-state.

Did Republicans Almost Get Scammed?

Just as Republicans around the state were getting all excited about Nicole Schneider, it seems they may have been taken for a ride.

Schneider, the heiress of the Schneider National trucking fortune, was supposedly considering a run for U.S. Senate against Tammy Baldwin. Her appeal was chiefly that she could self-fund an expensive campaign.

But as it seems to always do, Schneider’s social media history can’t hide. Judging by some of her past activity, she may not be all that conservative at all. From Vicki McKenna’s website:

Yesterday, Mediatrackers broke this story about a woman named Nicole Schneider running for US Senate against Tammy Baldwin. See that story HERE.OK FINE.  But IS SHE REALLY A REPUBLICAN? Or is she just a faker?  Well, you be the judge.  Here are links to her now DELETED tweets on everything from abortion and Planned Parenthood to Transphobia to like Tammy Baldwin, Hillary and Elizabeth Warren…to hating on Trump.  It’s a pile of anti-conservative stuff that for reasons only SHE knows, she doesn’t want anyone to see.Here is her now deleted post on “How to be a Social Justice Ally:  Working from and Against Privilege”.

LINK  **

Here are some deleted Tweets.  In these, she is critical of Gov Walker, Paul Ryan, Donald Trump–while seemingly praising Elizabeth Warren, Hillary Clinton and Tammy Baldwin.  Oh and she also seems to dislike SODA CONSUMPTION (!!)  (By the way, ma’am, I’m a Catholic and I voted for Trump!)

LINK **

Schneider has since deleted the tweets, but Vicki preserves them at the links above. Is Schneider a bona fide RINO? (a pejorative that gets tossed around far too often by people who can’t handle disagreement and believe everyone should agree with them…a paradox for an individualist ideology that stands opposed to homogeneity and collectivism. But I digress).

I don’t want to make any definitive conclusions about Ms. Schneider or her politics. I’ve been asked, after all, why I like this Democrat’s Facebook page or why I follow that progressive on Twitter by people who don’t really know their way around social media. People are also dynamic, and Trump a lightning rod who I’ve also criticized. However, Republican voters should use caution that Schneider might be an opportunist who doesn’t actually share many of their positions on the issues.

Now that Sean Duffy is officially out of contention, Republicans are starting to line up for the chance to take on Baldwin, who is widely seen as potentially vulnerable, especially after she locks arms with other Democrats and opposes the nomination of Neil Gorsuch for the Supreme Court. She’s also in hot water over her handling of the Tomah VA “Candy Land” scandal.

Wisconsinites have little patience for political grandstanding, and even less patience for politicians who leave veterans hanging out to dry – then pins the blame on a staffer and offers her hush money.

Names often bandied about as potential challengers for Baldwin are state Sen. Leah Vukmir, state Rep. Dale Kooyenga, hedge fund manager Eric Hovde, Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald, and Marine veteran/businessman Kevin Nicholson (who recently got the endorsement of mega-donor Dick Uihlein).

What the GOP needs to avoid at all costs, however, is a replay of the 2012 GOP primary, variously comparable to a circular firing squad, bloodbath, melee, or train wreck. Former Gov. Tommy Thompson emerged so badly injured from the primary, he had practically no money, while Baldwin had an entire summer to raise cash and plot her messaging.

Politifact Nails Baldwin for Supreme Hypocrisy

It took Senator Tammy Baldwin precisely 0.64 seconds to completely reverse her position on the Senate’s duty to “advise and consent” on presidential Supreme Court appointments. That’s about how long it took for President Trump to utter the name “Judge Neil Gorsuch.”

In 2016, when a nominee of President Obama was forced to sit in the proverbial waiting room for most of the year, Baldwin joined the chorus of feigned outrage from the left. But now that a new president – one who she doesn’t like as much – has made a nomination of his own, she’s completely reversed her position by supporting a filibuster to clog up the pipeline to the high court.

A new Politifact column declares Baldwin’s new position to be a full flip-flop. When Politifact calls out a Democrat, you know the case must be airtight. They write:

When [Merrick] Garland was nominated in March 2016, Republicans moved to block his nomination, which prompted the ire of Democrats.

Baldwin declared: “It’s the constitutional duty of the president to select a Supreme Court nominee, and the Senate has a responsibility to give that nominee a fair consideration with a timely hearing and a timely vote.”

But now that Baldwin is in the minority and facing a Republican nominee, she is supporting a filibuster that creates a roadblock to reaching that final vote. Her claim to “support” a cloture vote makes no sense since that isn’t up to her party — cloture would be pushed by Republicans and is only needed if Baldwin and other Democrats pursue a filibuster.

On the day Trump announced his nomination of Gorsuch, Baldwin said she would give him a fair hearing, but apparently she immediately suffered a severe case of amnesia and declared two days later her intention to vote against Gorsuch – before ever meeting with him. The hypocrisy didn’t slip past Governor Walker:

President Obama nominated Merrick Garland for the Supreme Court last March following the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. In the spirit of Obama’s own “elections have consequences” declaration, the Republican-controlled Senate decided not to take action on the Garland nomination. They cited a longstanding precedent that a lifetime appointment to the high court shouldn’t be made in the waning months of a presidency.

As the election’s outcome made plain, the argument seems to have held true that a Supreme Court nominee in the last few months of a president’s term might not reflect the sentiment of the time, and many voters made their decision in large measure because of the grave importance of who would fill the Scalia seat.

And of course, after the election of now-President Trump and the glorious departure of Obama, Garland packed his bags. Trump selected Judge Neil Gorsuch as his nominee on January 31.

Suddenly, Democrats whose hair was ablaze at the GOP’s refusal to hold hearings and an “up or down” vote on Garland…well, their hair is still ablaze, except now they’re angry the American people elected a Republican president and dashed their hopes of regaining control of the Senate.

The halls of Congress reek with hypocrisy. Suddenly, Democrats like Baldwin who hugged the Constitution while demanding a “timely hearing and a timely vote” on Garland are now hell bent on doing everything possible to stop Gorsuch – by all measures one of most qualified candidates for the Supreme Court imaginable and as close a fit to the strict constructionist, originalist judicial philosophy for which Justice Scalia was legendary.

In fact, Gorsuch has famously said that a judge who likes all the outcomes of his or her decisions is not a good judge – judges should apply the rule of law objectively, not manipulate it to create outcomes they like. This speaks volumes about Gorsuch’s sterling character – and Democrats’ rabid opposition to him speaks volumes about theirs.

For their part, the Republicans argue that, unlike their opposition to Garland, blocking a SCOTUS nomination made literally within days of a new president’s inauguration is unprecedented. That’s not stopping Democrat Senators from flip-flopping en masse like a sinking boatload of wet waffles – even some from states Trump won, like Wisconsin.

Baldwin’s staff is trying hard to muddy the waters with as much double-speak as they can muster, but Politifact does an excellent job of cutting through the nonsense her office is putting out:

In an email, Baldwin spokesman John Kraus said the senator’s position is consistent because she supported a hearing, a committee vote and a floor vote for both nominees.

Politifact goes through the byzantine Senate rules behind the filibuster to explain why Baldwin is a hypocrite. Essentially, a filibuster is the use of Senate rules to create a debate of infinite duration, thereby blocking any final vote on the nominee (only in Washington, eh?). A filibuster can be stopped by the use of cloture, a vote that sets a limit on debate – that vote requires 60 votes, so Democrats theoretically have enough votes to stand in the way.

The Baldwin spokesman slyly told Politifact that the senator supports a vote for cloture, but since she’s in the minority, her party wouldn’t even be in a position to make such a motion. Her position on cloture is as meaningful as my position on the clothing lines at Kohl’s. Politifact explains further:

But cloture is a maneuver executed by the majority party (Republicans in this case), so Baldwin’s “support” for that is both unnecessary and irrelevant.

The filibuster/cloture tactic has only been used four times for nominees to the Supreme Court since 1968 – and this one would be in the first few months of a presidency. The obstructionism and the hypocritical double-speak to justify it is hard to fathom. Fortunately, the Republicans can and might (and should) simply change Senate rules (with a simple majority vote) to eliminate the 60-vote cloture requirement for Supreme Court nominees.

The Democrats used this “nuclear option” for lower court nominees, presumably to get judges approved and keep the courts moving effectively. Since the Supreme Court is, well, the supreme court, it stands to reason that using the nuclear option to get Gorsuch approved is of even more supreme importance and even more supremely logical.

Elections do have consequences, and unfortunately for obstructionist Democrats like Tammy Baldwin, Justice Neil Gorsuch will be one of them.

2018 Senate: Duffy’s Out

Rep. Sean Duffy has announced he will not challenge Sen. Tammy Baldwin in 2018.

His statement, published in the Journal Sentinel:

“After much prayer and deliberation, Rachel and I have decided that this is not the right time for me to run for Senate. We have eight great kids and family always comes first. Baldwin will be beat because her radically liberal Madison record and ideas are out of synch with Wisconsin. I look forward to helping our Republican nominee defeat her. I’ll continue to work my heart out for the families of the 7th district, and I’m excited about the great things we will accomplish with our united Republican government.”

We’ll update this later.

Fitzgerald: Duffy “Well Positioned” to Take on Baldwin

It looks like Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald agrees with Morning Martini that Sean Duffy is in a good position to take on Sen. Tammy Baldwin in 2018. A talked-about possible candidate for the office himself, does this mean Fitzgerald is throwing cold water on those rumors?

We’ve previously written about the Duffy versus Baldwin dynamic. Because Duffy is demonstrably stronger in northern Wisconsin than other Republicans, and theoretically stronger elsewhere because of his early support for Trump (who won Wisconsin, and won big in rural areas of the state), he is uniquely positioned to be the leading contender against Baldwin.

That calculus is this: Duffy was a strong Trump supporter from the very beginning. This turned out to be genius; Duffy’s district swung heavily for Trump in both the primary and general elections, and newfound GOP voters in rural areas could prove crucial.

Broadening the scope to the prospects of the Senate GOP in 2018, I write:

If Trump’s tenure as president is a success, it’s very possible – I daresay likely – the Republicans could gain a filibuster-proof majority in 2018. Most importantly for Wisconsin, the Badger State could oust one of the farthest-left Senators currently in the Senate and replace her with a commonsense, well-liked, and steadfast conservative.

Hedge fund manager Eric Hovde, who hasn’t said whether he’ll run again, could be formidable because of the name ID he built in 2012 and because he’s (to paraphrase Trump) very, very rich. Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch would also be formidable since, in all likelihood, she would have the support of the southeastern establishment.

The biggest obstacle to the GOP toppling Baldwin in 2018? A brutal primary like the one in 2012 that left eventual nominee Tommy Thompson essentially broke, paving the way for a surprisingly astute Baldwin campaign messaging apparatus to paint the former governor as “not for you anymore.”

Was Duffy’s “Communist” Quip a Genius Move?

There’s nothing like a good old-fashioned Twitter war to shape a news cycle, for better or for worse. Congressman Sean Duffy, who represents Wisconsin’s 7th district, started one recently after he called Madison a “communist community” on Fox News.

The comment might strike some as a minor gaffe, but Duffy is no out-of-control, off-script flame thrower. He’s strategically savvy and very much in control of his message.

Instead, I see a potential strategy for Duffy: leveraging his cable news appearances to grow his statewide conservative credibility. If that was Duffy’s intent, another Wisconsin congressman, Mark Pocan – who represents the Madison area – took the bait by demanding an apology.

Rep. Pocan, who is quite cordial but also very progressive, boldly went on Tucker Carlson’s new show (already famous for Carlson’s relentless grilling of his progressive guests) to explain that Duffy is misguidedly “Trumpizing” Wisconsin politics by slinging insults in the model of Donald Trump. Pocan advertised the appearance on Twitter, extending the social media battle.

Carlson read the Wisconsin Communist Party’s platform on-air and asked what part of it Pocan disagrees with. Brushing the question aside, Pocan criticized Duffy’s tongue-in-cheek response to Pocan’s apology demand. Duffy had tweeted in reply that The Left has no sense of humor and offered to send puppies to Madison’s safe spaces as a consolation.

Within one media cycle, the story had made its way into the mainstream media. More importantly, conservative commentators – mainly seated in deep-red southeast Wisconsin – saddled up to defend Duffy and, in the process, repeat and magnify Duffy’s comments about Madison being a communist enclave, as well as his poking fun at eminently mockable lefty concepts like therapy puppies and safe spaces. What do those statements have in common?

They’re ambrosia – red meat – for conservatives.

As for “Trumpizing” Wisconsin politics, Pocan might’ve missed Politics 101 and the entire 2016 presidential election. Trump was successful by constantly picking on a foil – the mainstream media, by the end of the campaign. Democrats have tried in the past few years, unsuccessfully, to use the Koch Brothers as their foil.

By picking a city he will never come close to winning in a hypothetical statewide contest – one that most Wisconsinites look at in the Dreyfusian witticism as 76 square miles surrounded by reality – Duffy couldn’t have chosen a better foil.

Duffy leveraged one comment on Fox News into a multi-day media cycle aimed at conservatives in southeast Wisconsin. A congressman from far-northern Wisconsin, Duffy would need to make rapid and solid inroads with voters in the super-conservative Milwaukee suburbs, which is an indispensable puzzle piece for any Republican looking to win a statewide race.

The question is whether Duffy is looking to mount a statewide race, which at this point is pure speculation. I’ve previously written that Duffy would be an ideal contender to run for U.S. Senate against Sen. Tammy Baldwin (also a creature of Madison) in 2018. I also said one of Duffy’s unique strengths versus other possible Republican contenders is that he’s all but immune to being dragged down by his support of Trump, as Pocan tried to do:

That calculus is this: Duffy was a strong Trump supporter from the very beginning. This turned out to be genius; Duffy’s district swung heavily for Trump in both the primary and general elections, and newfound GOP voters in rural areas could prove crucial.That calculus is this: Duffy was a strong Trump supporter from the very beginning. This turned out to be genius; Duffy’s district swung heavily for Trump in both the primary and general elections, and newfound GOP voters in rural areas could prove crucial…

Trump won Duffy’s district handily. He also won Democrat Ron Kind’s 3rd District. If the Trump trend holds, Duffy would enter the race with a decided advantage among rural voters – not just because of Trump, but because of the rural appeal Duffy has maintained since voters first sent him to Congress to replace retiring lefty Dave Obey in 2010.

Duffy has handily won re-election ever since.

In addition to winning Wisconsin overall, Trump won the all-important Fox Valley by a considerable margin. Further, a Duffy candidacy for Senate – should he emerge from a potential primary – would certainly be embraced by voters in the WOW counties, among the deepest-red counties in the country.

Pocan’s Trump attack could only enhance Duffy’s standing in much of the state’s rural counties that led Wisconsin to becoming a Trump state:

Trump-generalIf Sean Duffy wanted to expand his name ID to crucial conservative enclaves beyond his own vast northern Wisconsin district and others that went for Trump (like Democrat Ron Kind’s 3rd district) – which are areas the Democrats have relied on in the past to tip the balance in narrow statewide races – then he could’ve executed no more perfect a strategy to endear himself in places like Waukesha, Ozaukee, and Washington Counties and the Fox Valley than he did via the “commy-gate” comment.

Senator Baldwin’s Wolf Crusade

Jay Weber just reminded us that Tammy Baldwin is now pushing to remove the wolf from the endangered species list. While those of us from up nort’ and the po dunk understand this is just common sense given the plague wolves have become, Weber reminded us that, for a hard-lefty like Baldwin, it’s going out on a political limb.

Incubated and matriculated in the progressive crucible of Madison, it’s hard to imagine Baldwin’s stepping outside her political safe space was an instinct that came naturally. She’s almost certainly making a political calculation, especially given the sudden swing of rural Wisconsinites toward the GOP, Weber noted.

Baldwin penned an op-ed in the Stevens Point Journal on the issue Sunday:

Farmers have found livestock injured and killed by wolves that are straying closer to their herds than in previous years. Families have lost pets. Parents have decided it’s no longer safe to let their kids play where they normally do. These concerns, and the expertise of wildlife science, tell us we should take on the gray wolf problem in our state by acting again to delist the wolf from the Endangered Species List and pass management of the wolf back to the State of Wisconsin.

Three days prior to the column, State Sen. Tom Tiffany (R-Hazelhurst) and state Rep. Adam Jarchow (R-Balsam Lake) had urged Baldwin to support de-listing the wolf.

Tiffany sees Baldwin taking up the issue as a gateway to bipartisan support for de-listing, a rural Wisconsin priority. “If some of her colleagues saw a Democrat like she is taking the lead on this issue, they would probably follow along,” Tiffany told WPR.

In a post published on Saturday, I made the case that that Duffy’s rural appeal and early support for Trump would be a tremendous advantage if he were to run against Baldwin in 2018:

Trump won Duffy’s district handily. He also won Democrat Ron Kind’s 3rd District. If the Trump trend holds, Duffy would enter the race with a decided advantage among rural voters – not just because of Trump, but because of the rural appeal Duffy has maintained since voters first sent him to Congress to replace retiring lefty Dave Obey in 2010.

It’s not political soothsaying that the trouncing Trump gave Clinton in rural counties could’ve changed the map for at least the next two years. Baldwin, if she’s not reading Morning Martini, appears to have arrived at the same conclusion: rural Wisconsin is now an arena in which Democrats must now do combat.

How The GOP Could Defeat Baldwin in 2018

Six years go by so fast! Elected in 2012 over Tommy Thompson, Sen. Tammy Baldwin is up for re-election in 2018. But who will face her, and where does a betting man put his money?

Perhaps the biggest question is who will emerge to challenge Baldwin. There is plenty of GOP talent in the state, from members of Congress to the state legislature to the private sector. If Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch is interested, she would likely have the support of the southeastern Wisconsin talk radio infrastructure (which has been greatly weakened after WTMJ threw in the towel on their conservative talk format).

Another potential challenger includes Eric Hovde, the very, very rich (to paraphrase Trump) hedge fund manager or whatever he is who made a good run in the 2012 Republican primary. One also has to think people with high perches in the legislature like Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald, or some other ambitious legislator has at least entertained the idea of running.

The most often-discussed challenger, and perhaps early frontrunner to face Baldwin, is Rep. Sean Duffy of the 7th District, which covers northern Wisconsin writ large. Duffy is young (age 45), charismatic, and can easily appeal to both the rural voters who found his literal lumberjack campaigning a refreshing change from stale, sterile politics-as-usual, and the critical suburban voters of the Fox River Valley and the WOW counties ringing Milwaukee. It’s just impossible not to like Duffy – and he’s missing no opportunity to raise his profile such as by giving commentary on Fox News.

Kleefisch would also be formidable. She has a statewide office, she’s been expanding her outreach, she has strong support in critical southeast Wisconsin, and most of all – she’s incredibly likable, genuine, sharp, and steeped for years in the issues at the forefront of Wisconsin voters. A Kleefisch versus Duffy contest would be a tough decision that might come down to a pure political calculus.

That calculus is this: Duffy was a strong Trump supporter from the very beginning. This turned out to be genius; Duffy’s district swung heavily for Trump in both the primary and general elections, and newfound GOP voters in rural areas could prove crucial.

trump-primary
Trump won Sean Duffy’s district, the 7th, in the GOP primary
Trump-general
Trump won the vast majority of counties in Duffy’s district in the general election

In addition, Politico cited rural Wisconsin (a descriptor fitting of Duffy’s district) as crucial to Trump winning Wisconsin:

Though he underperformed in the suburban WOW counties, turnout in the state’s two Democratic strongholds, Milwaukee County and Madison’s Dane County was smaller than in 2012 — and dramatically smaller in Milwaukee County than four years earlier. Trump also blew up Wisconsin’s 2012 map, winning 63 percent in rural areas, which made up a little over a quarter of the vote, and outpacing Romney by 10 points in those areas.

Trump won Duffy’s district handily. He also won Democrat Ron Kind’s 3rd District. If the Trump trend holds, Duffy would enter the race with a decided advantage among rural voters – not just because of Trump, but because of the rural appeal Duffy has maintained since voters first sent him to Congress to replace retiring lefty Dave Obey in 2010.

Duffy has handily won re-election ever since.

In addition to winning Wisconsin overall, Trump won the all-important Fox Valley by a considerable margin. Further, a Duffy candidacy for Senate – should he emerge from a potential primary – would certainly be embraced by voters in the WOW counties, among the deepest-red counties in the country.

If Trump a) Doesn’t screw up his first term and b) Returns the favor and offers his support for Duffy in rural, blue-collar areas of the state, that could make all the difference in retaining those voters for the GOP and unseating Baldwin in 2018.

This prognostication admittedly overlooks the potential of a Kleefisch, Hovde, or other candidacy – but the new reality that rural, outstate Wisconsin voters who once kept uber-lefty Dave Obey in office for 143 years are now a potential Republican voting bloc must be considered when weighing someone like Duffy against a candidate from the conservative bunker in southeast Wisconsin.

Perhaps the biggest threat to a GOP victory in 2018 is a brutal, costly primary like the one that left Tommy Thompson almost broke as he went on to face Baldwin in 2012. The GOP intelligentsia would be wise to consider the new map and coalesce around one and only one candidate in 2018.

Baldwin’s race is emblematic of the challenge facing Senate Democrats in 2018. While the GOP was on the offensive in 2016 thanks to the GOP wave in 2010, the tables will be turned in 2018. Of 33 Senate seats up for re-election in 2018, 25 are currently held by Democrats.

As with Wisconsin, many of those contests will take place in states that Trump won – some overwhelmingly. Townhall summarizes (see below for my own synopsis):

Indiana: Democrat Joe Donnely is up for re-election. Many analysts said Donnely lucked out with an easy win when former Sen. Richard Lugar (R) was primaried and a weaker GOP candidate ran against him in the general election. Donnely probably won’t have that luxury next go-around. Indiana just elected Rep. Todd Young (R) by a ten-point margin.

Montana: Democrat Jon Tester is up for re-election. He knows a thing or two about running races. He lead the 2016 Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. He will need that experience fighting for his job in Montana, a state that voted for Trump by a 21-point margin. However, Montana has a penchant for electing Democrats statewide. While voting for Trump, Montana voters also chose to re-elect Democrat Gov. Steve Bullock.

Florida: Democrat Bill Nelson has run many races in the Sunshine State and now he’s asking voters in Florida again to send him to D.C. He’s a known entity there, holding office since 1972. However, Florida did just elect a Republican president and overwhelmingly voted for Republican Marco Rubio by an almost 8-point margin over Rep. Patrick Murphy. Rubio performed strongly in Latino districts that typically vote Democrat. A lot of candidate options are on the table for the GOP: Rep. David Jolly, Rep. Ron DeSantis, or outgoing Gov. Rick Scott. Judging how Rubio performed against Murphy, Florida GOP should consider another Latino – as that voting base shows stronger preferences for fellow Latinos, even when the candidate is a Republican.

Missouri: Democrat Claire McCaskill is up for re-election again. Her continual hold on the seat is a testament to how many times the state GOP has screwed the pooch. Rep. Todd Akin was polling ahead of her until his “legitimate rape” comments finally burned his chances in 2012. Missouri is a red state. Voters there chose Trump by 19 points, re-elected Sen. Roy Blunt by 3 points, and flipped their governors’ seat by electing Republican Eric Greitens by almost six points. McCaskill should be done if the Missouri GOP plays their cards right.

Ohio: Democrat Sherrod Brown has done well in Ohio. He’s held office there for over 20 years and won election to the Senate twice. However, if there is a year to oust him from power, the time is now. Ohio pivoted strongly to the GOP in the 2016 election. Trump won the largest margin in Ohio than any Republican in the past five elections. Republican Sen. Rob Portman won his re-election by an astounding 21-point margin. The Rust Belt looks to be turning red and it could spell the end for Sen. Brown.

North Dakota: It’s a little perplexing how Sen. Heidi Heitkamp even got elected in North Dakota. It surely is a testament to the Republicans’ bad showing in 2012. Nonetheless, the state has been returning to its blood-red roots. Voters there went for Trump by 36 points and voted for Sen. Hoeven by a 68-point margin… You read that correctly. North Dakota voters preferred Republican Hoeven 78.6 to 17 against the Democrat challenger.

Wisconsin: Democrat Tammy Baldwin is up for re-election. No state shocked the country more than Wisconsin. It hadn’t gone for a Republican since Reagan in 1984. Sen. Ron Johnson (R) came back from the dead to win re-election against Russ Feingold. Johnson clawed his way from a double-digit deficit in the polls to a 3-point victory on Election Day. Gov. Scott Walker also has an impeccable operation in the Badger State – winning election three times in a row despite a union onslaught. This will be an interesting stat to watch.

West Virginia: Once a Democrat stronghold, West Virginia is now ruby-red. Coal country is Trump friendly and voters in this state voted for the president-elect by a 42-point margin. Their legislature and majority of their House delegation has gone Republican. However, it will be quite difficult to oust Sen. Joe Manchin. West Virginia residents still appreciate their blue-dogs. Despite choosing Trump, they voted to elect Democrat Jim Justice to the governor’s mansion by a wide margin. Sen. Manchin is perhaps the most conservative Democrat in the Senate. This seat may not go red until he retires, but anything is possible when his national party brand is as hated as it is in the Mountain State.

Pennsylvania: This is last of the three major Rust Belt States in play in 2018. Sen. Bob Casey has been involved in Pennsylvania politics for quite a long time. It’s actually a family affair- his father held office before him. Republican Sen. Pat Toomey proved all the polls wrong by winning against his Democrat challenger in 2016. On top of that, Trump became the first Republican presidential candidate to win the Keystone State since 1988. This is a light-blue state that may be turning red with the Rust Belts.

Let me summarize. Democrats are up for re-election in the following states that Trump won bigly:

  • Montana (Sen. Jon Tester) Trump +21%
  • Missouri (Sen. Claire McCaskill) Trump +19%
  • North Dakota (Sen. Heidi Heitkamp) Trump +36%
  • West Virginia (Sen. Joe Manchin) Trump +42%

Flipping those four states alone to the GOP while holding its own ground would decimate the Senate Democrat caucus. If the Trump coalition holds, wins in the remaining five states Townhall lists are possible – if Trump plays ball. The Republicans currently hold 51 seats – flipping nine would…well, do the math.

And that’s just nine out of the 25 seats Democrats are defending in the next cycle. The GOP has to avoid running crazy candidates like they did in some races in 2012. As is the case in Wisconsin, the party should coalesce around the strongest candidates in each state, with an eye to the new populist mantle forged by Trump.

That shouldn’t be a problem considering Republican candidates have routed Democrats down-ticket in the 2010, 2014, and 2016 elections, leaving the Dems with an extremely thin bench and the Republican ranks teeming with talent.

If Trump’s tenure as president is a success, it’s very possible – I daresay likely – the Republicans could gain a filibuster-proof majority in 2018. Most importantly for Wisconsin, the Badger State could oust one of the farthest-left Senators currently in the Senate and replace her with a commonsense, well-liked, and steadfast conservative.

Was the Democrat apparatus at work in Candyland scandal?

Now that Marquette Baylor is pushing for her former boss to be investigated, further reporting opens a new series of important questions to be raised. Beyond the abhorrent negligence that indirectly led to the deaths of service men and women, the scandal suggests just how carefully Democrats plan and protect their power.

Dan Bice reports:

The report found that Baldwin’s constituent services team failed to relay constituent concerns to the office’s top staff. From there, the report said, her senior aides took too long to formulate an “effective response” to the problems.

It’s no secret that Democrats, especially in Wisconsin, carve out platforms that hinge simply on not being Republicans — Mary Burke’s trainwreck failed candidacy was a case study in that. But here we see a careful political calculation, not just to protect the Senator, but perhaps also the longtime Congressman who represents Tomah, Rep. Ron Kind. His challenger in 2014, Tony Kurtz, is an Army veteran who gave the entrenched incumbent a run for his money. This kind of scandal could have certainly shaken the foundation of Kind’s lofty stoop.

In giving Baldwin’s team the benefit of the doubt that they would certainly do their best to fly to the aid of ailing and abused veterans, what power structure caused such a delay in action, and why couldn’t something have been done without the requisite media parade?

If that’s not the case, then certainly Baldwin’s team failed to act and people died.

Did the Democrat apparatus in Wisconsin, and perhaps nationally, put pressure on Baldwin’s office to shut down the scandal for the sake of protecting their power in Wisconsin’s Third Congressional District?