Tommy Washbush / Freepik
Clockwise from top: Kamala Harris, Derrick Van Orden, Tammy Baldwin, Melissa Agard and Bryan Steil in a crystal ball.
One of the expectations of a political pundit is that he will make predictions about the next election. He’s expected to do this so that, when he turns out to be wrong, his readers can feel smarter than he is — not that certain pundits don’t make readers feel smarter on a weekly basis.
We’re all swimming in polls and data points, so I’ll keep it simple and offer just one reason for each shaky prediction I offer below. Here goes.
It’s generally acknowledged that the presidential race is unpredictable. So, let me start with an easy one and work my way up to the big office. State Sen. Melissa Agard will be the next Dane County executive. The reason? She’s got virtually all the money, endorsements and name recognition. (Pellebon did get the Wisconsin State Journal endorsement, but it won’t be nearly enough.) There appears to be no contest between Agard and her challenger, Dana Pellebon. That’s a shame because this is a vitally important office and voters deserved a much higher profile race than they got. County executive is a nonpartisan office that is typically on the April ballot, not competing for attention with a race for president. It’s only up now because of the timing of former Exec Joe Parisi’s resignation. I thought Parisi was a really good executive, but I wish he had set this up differently.
The next easiest calls are the Madison public schools referendums. There’s a $100 million operating budget question and a $507 million capital item. I predict they’ll both pass because they’re on a presidential ballot. Madison voters will turn out in droves to vote for Kamala Harris and a lot of them will be surprised to see the school questions on the same ballot. Knowing next to nothing about the details, they’ll simply cast “yes” votes because they’re supporters of public schools. (So am I, but that’s why I’m voting “no.”)
Next up is the operating budget referendum for the city of Madison. This is a somewhat harder call, but I’m going to say that this one will pass as well and for mostly the same reason. Harris voters are pro-government voters. But I would think this question will run well behind the school questions because voters are used to voting on school referendums while this is a first-ever city question.
Now, let’s take a look at the state Legislature. I’m going to say Democrats will pick up 10 seats in the Assembly and two in the Senate and the reason is simple: finally, we have fair maps. If I’m right, Democrats will be a little bit disappointed because they think they have a shot at picking up 12 or more seats in the Assembly and four in the Senate. I just don’t think they’ll prevail in the hotly contested Senate seats west of Madison and in the north Milwaukee suburbs. But it would still be a good night as they would narrow the Republicans’ margin to 54-45 (from 64-35 now) in the Assembly and to 20-13 in the Senate (from 22-11 now). It sets them up for taking back majorities in one or both houses in 2026. And if I’m wrong about the two contested Senate seats that I think they’ll lose, it will have been a very good night for Team Blue all around.
There’s also a constitutional amendment on the ballot, placed there by legislative Republicans. Its practical effect would be to stop Madison or any other local jurisdiction from allowing noncitizens to vote in local elections, not that anyone is proposing that right now. The language would prohibit that in all elections, but it’s already banned for federal and state offices. I think this one will pass because all of the Trump voters will vote for it while just enough Harris voters will vote “yes” as well. It will seem straightforward to them: you should have to be a citizen to vote.
Let’s move on to federal races. I’m going to guess that the Republicans will keep their 6-2 advantage in the state’s delegation in the House of Representatives. Democrats have good candidates in both Southeastern Wisconsin’s First Congressional District (Peter Barca) and in the Southwest’s Third District (Rebecca Cooke). But GOP Rep. Bryan Steil has the right moderate profile for the First and Rep. Derrick Van Orden’s media has been really good in the Third. It’s so good that it makes him appear to be a sane and likable human being, contrary to so many of his actions and public statements. But if Democrats do pull off an upset I think it’s more likely to be in this La Crosse-based district than in the district around Kenosha.
Okay, I’ve put it off long enough. Now for the really tough ones.
I’m going to say Tammy Baldwin will defeat challenger Eric Hovde for the U.S. Senate. The one reason? She got the Wisconsin Farm Bureau Federation endorsement, the first Democrat for statewide office to get that nod in 20 years. It’s not the endorsement itself that matters so much as what it represents. Baldwin has been working rural parts of the state for the whole 12 years that she’s been in the Senate and not just at election time. She’s sponsored budget amendments, sometimes known as “pork,” for countless communities and she’s supported delisting (which means removing prohibitions on hunting, among other things) for the gray wolf, a popular position in northern Wisconsin. So, I think Baldwin will rack up big numbers in Dane County while narrowing Hovde’s margin in rural districts.
Nonetheless, I think Democrats will lose control of the Senate even with a Baldwin win here. They’ve already lost the West Virginia seat because the only Democrat who could win it, Joe Manchin, is retiring. And they’re likely to lose Jon Tester’s seat in Montana if not also Sherrod Brown’s seat in Ohio. Overall, Democrats need to defend 23 seats this cycle while Republicans only have 11 at risk. There is an outside chance that Colin Allred will upset Ted Cruz in Texas and wouldn’t that be sweet? Yes, it would, but don’t count on it.
And for president I’m going with Kamala Harris. Why? Because I just can’t face the alternative? Well, yes, but also because she’s not Hillary Clinton. Clinton was the second most unpopular candidate to run for president since pollsters began asking the question. Only Donald Trump narrowly edged her out for the top spot. And yet she only lost the Electoral College by 77,000 votes in three swing states, including Wisconsin. Plus, she ran a terrible campaign, not so much as stepping foot in our state, which she lost by 22,000 votes. Harris is not as unpopular and she has been practically living here since July while Trump is the same guy he was in 2016, only more so. His hard ceiling hasn’t budged while Harris still has room to grow. One measure: Hillary won white college-educated women, what you might think of as her core supporters, by seven points. Harris leads in that demographic by 40 points. I’ll go with Harris both in Wisconsin and for all the marbles.
Finally, let’s face it, if Harris wins nothing else will matter much — at least for a week or so until the exultation wears off. And if Trump wins nothing else will matter — for four long years.
Good luck to us all.
Dave Cieslewicz is a Madison- and Upper Peninsula-based writer who served as mayor of Madison from 2003 to 2011. You can read more of his work at Yellow Stripes & Dead Armadillos.
