It’s not as uninteresting as you imply. There’s also a strong union-blue presence (also seen on the south side of Chicago), where there are swaths of blue collar union workers who vote blue due to financial progressivism rather than social progressivism. You’ll find pockets of people who have no problem pulling out racial slurs but also voted for Kamala.
There’s also what I call the “Janesville conservative”, or people who likely worked or know someone who worked for Scott Walker and/or Paul Ryan. Their politics are much more conservative coastal elite / country club rather rural / pastoral.
The largest number of union members in Wisconsin may be government workers. (Incidentally, the outgoing Governor was originally a public school teacher.)
people who likely worked or know someone who worked for Scott Walker and/or Paul Ryan.
What do you mean by "worked for"? If you meant that literally, it wouldn't be an electorally significant number of people.
WRT "uninteresting", this phrasing I found reductive to the rather interesting political dynamics in Wisconsin:
Wisconsin is a "purple" state, but that's somewhat misleading, because the people aren't generally "centrist". Rather, the state is deeply divided between left wing and right wing, as evidenced by Wisconsin's polar opposite Senators Tammy Baldwin and Ron Johnson.
WRT union-blue presence, I'm speaking from a position of firsthand experience: friends and family who are union-blue and not public sector workers. Paper mill workers and railroaders, specifically.
WRT "worked for", you'll notice my full phrasing included "or know someone who worked for". Janesville is not a sprawling metropolis and most people know most people. Paul Ryan and Scott Walker have deep connections with the south-central part of the state, which has a thick flavor of coastal / country club elite that is not found elsewhere in Wisconsin. Ryan and Walker's success in Wisconsin is interesting given how much they were not rural yokels and would stick out like a sore thumb in most taverns north of the conifer line. Ron Johnson was part of that same anti-Obama political wave, but he's maintained his presence by embracing MAGA in a way that Ryan and Walker never did.
There is some centrism in there, especially if you consider that MAGA is further right than the Tea Party, and have probably successfully shifted the Overton window.
WRT union-blue presence, I'm speaking from a position of firsthand experience: friends and family who are union-blue and not public sector workers. Paper mill workers and railroaders, specifically.
I'm certainly not denying their existence, but their political potency is another matter.
Janesville is not a sprawling metropolis and most people know most people.
That's ridiculous. I've lived in smaller cities than Janesville, live in one now, and most people do not in fact know most people. I don't even know most of the people who live in my building.
Ryan and Walker's success in Wisconsin is interesting given how much they were not rural yokels and would stick out like a sore thumb in most taverns north of the conifer line.
This is true of most politicians, indeed Trump himself. Politicians are not "average" people.
There is some centrism in there, especially if you consider that MAGA is further right than the Tea Party, and have probably successfully shifted the Overton window.
I put "centrist" in quotes specifically because I think the line theory of politics is bunk, the idea that political views can be put on a line of left-center-right or liberal-moderate-conservative. The elections of Trump should have completely refuted that theory, but it somehow survives in reality denial form. Anyway, I don't think the Tea Party was ever centrist.
Idk man I think you're just going to argue point-by-point literally anything I write. I'm pointing out, as someone very familiar with Wisconsin, that coming onto this forum and making claims about the state that reduces its political dynamics to "deeply divided between left wing and right wing" is silly.
I think you're just going to argue point-by-point literally anything I write.
What's wrong with arguing point by point?
I'm pointing out, as someone very familiar with Wisconsin, that coming onto this forum and making claims about the state
I would point out that I live in Wisconsin and have lived in Wisconsin for more than 30 years. You?
reduces its political dynamics to "deeply divided between left wing and right wing"
I don't think "reduces" is a fair characterization. My point is that although Wisconsin is a "swing" state, it often swings quite wildly, again evidenced by its two Senators for example, so purple does not imply centrist or moderate, and the superficial appearance of Wisconsin election results does not preclude it from being a hotbed of progressive politics (and/or the opposite of progressive politics).
Comments
It’s not as uninteresting as you imply. There’s also a strong union-blue presence (also seen on the south side of Chicago), where there are swaths of blue collar union workers who vote blue due to financial progressivism rather than social progressivism. You’ll find pockets of people who have no problem pulling out racial slurs but also voted for Kamala.
There’s also what I call the “Janesville conservative”, or people who likely worked or know someone who worked for Scott Walker and/or Paul Ryan. Their politics are much more conservative coastal elite / country club rather rural / pastoral.
Uninteresting?
The largest number of union members in Wisconsin may be government workers. (Incidentally, the outgoing Governor was originally a public school teacher.)
What do you mean by "worked for"? If you meant that literally, it wouldn't be an electorally significant number of people.
WRT "uninteresting", this phrasing I found reductive to the rather interesting political dynamics in Wisconsin:
WRT union-blue presence, I'm speaking from a position of firsthand experience: friends and family who are union-blue and not public sector workers. Paper mill workers and railroaders, specifically.
WRT "worked for", you'll notice my full phrasing included "or know someone who worked for". Janesville is not a sprawling metropolis and most people know most people. Paul Ryan and Scott Walker have deep connections with the south-central part of the state, which has a thick flavor of coastal / country club elite that is not found elsewhere in Wisconsin. Ryan and Walker's success in Wisconsin is interesting given how much they were not rural yokels and would stick out like a sore thumb in most taverns north of the conifer line. Ron Johnson was part of that same anti-Obama political wave, but he's maintained his presence by embracing MAGA in a way that Ryan and Walker never did.
There is some centrism in there, especially if you consider that MAGA is further right than the Tea Party, and have probably successfully shifted the Overton window.
I'm certainly not denying their existence, but their political potency is another matter.
That's ridiculous. I've lived in smaller cities than Janesville, live in one now, and most people do not in fact know most people. I don't even know most of the people who live in my building.
This is true of most politicians, indeed Trump himself. Politicians are not "average" people.
I put "centrist" in quotes specifically because I think the line theory of politics is bunk, the idea that political views can be put on a line of left-center-right or liberal-moderate-conservative. The elections of Trump should have completely refuted that theory, but it somehow survives in reality denial form. Anyway, I don't think the Tea Party was ever centrist.
Idk man I think you're just going to argue point-by-point literally anything I write. I'm pointing out, as someone very familiar with Wisconsin, that coming onto this forum and making claims about the state that reduces its political dynamics to "deeply divided between left wing and right wing" is silly.
What's wrong with arguing point by point?
I would point out that I live in Wisconsin and have lived in Wisconsin for more than 30 years. You?
I don't think "reduces" is a fair characterization. My point is that although Wisconsin is a "swing" state, it often swings quite wildly, again evidenced by its two Senators for example, so purple does not imply centrist or moderate, and the superficial appearance of Wisconsin election results does not preclude it from being a hotbed of progressive politics (and/or the opposite of progressive politics).