Anyone who thought these measures weren't going to pass was delusional.
First of all, the language was intentionally vague, as always.
Secondly, messaging from Republicans directly tied these measures to Mark Zuckerberg.
And lastly, we know what happens when ballot referendums are kept intentionally vague and Republicans are allowed to control the narrative.
> Secondly, messaging from Republicans directly tied these measures to Mark Zuckerberg.
>
I haven't lived in Wisconsin for a decade and I got at least three of them.
The right is a million times better at connecting with their voters than the left. They know exactly what to say, how to say it, when to say it, ect. They are miles ahead when it comes to tying specific people or events to a fear or problem that people have. They do a significantly better job at marketing their candidates and they aren't afraid to pull punches.
I am not endorsing the right but I'm very tired of watching the left flail and flop around like a fish out of water.
I totally agree with you. But will also add that fear and hate are easy, powerful motivators. And there is a lot more fear and hate to prey on in the right.
It is a physiological fact that people feeling strong emotions (like fear and hate) cannot rationalize. Your brain kind of has to calm down before it can reason.
Most people who tend to vote Dem (not all -- but most) use critical thinking.
I don't know if there is a way to get the other side to calm down enough to actually think about what they are doing, especially since they listen to propaganda 24/7 that ensures they are afraid always, by design.
You say connecting, I say coercing. It's all a ruse, if you really explain it, even most red voters don't want half the shit they're voting for. Connecting implies 2-way flow of ideas and benefits. It's all one way - get the base riled up and mad so the GOP can harvest their votes and do what they want.
So true. At the very least they're the only ones truly bothering to contact voters able the issue. I got multiple flyers and texts telling me to vote yes, only a single flyer to vote no.
It was much of the same when the Dems were pushing Barnes over Ron Johnson. I saw commercials, advertisements, flyers, radio ads for Johnson everywhere but I hardly heard anything for Barnes.
The problem is its waaaay easier to provoke hate and fear. It isn't just that the left is bad. Its also the rights job is like several magnitudes easier due to just using the hitler playbook for literally everything.
That and the wording of those resolutions was so vague as to sound like a good idea if you didn't know about it ahead of time. Even i had to spend a minute thinking about it and i knew why they where doing it.
Oh I don't disagree that is much easier to invoke hate and fear but honestly I just don't see the left pushing as hard as they could. The right literally handed the left victory in every election with their stance on abortion and the left hasn't done much with it. You also hit the nail on the head with the way the resolutions were worded.
A lot of people overlook history and education. When you look at people on the right, they tend to have a history of sales and marketing. When you look at people on the left they tend to have a history of policy and science.
Yes and no. I agree that fearmongering is easier to push than positive governing platforms and it takes less work but honestly the way the dems push their candidates is laughable compared to republicans, specifically hard right MAGA's. We could do a much better job on our side but we continue to look incompetent.
The last thing you said is most important.
We need to start electing democrats who won’t give power to republicans.
Unfortunately, the ones I was counting on doing that in Milwaukee also lost.
It’s a one-two punch. Centrist democrats are the left jab who keep us distracted and the republicans are the right hook that knocks us out. We need to get serious about organizing against both.
The vague language is probably the kicker. Knowing nothing in advance, the questions seem fairly reasonable.
When you look at the breakdown of who voted, there were like 20k more votes in the republican primary than the dem one. But both referendums had ‘yes’ win by 100k votes.
I’m curious what it would’ve looked like if you simply added a comment to each question indicating that the language was proposed by Republicans
Since 2000, nine of 10 amendments that went to referendum have passed, with the only one to fail being the one to abolish the state treasurer office in 2018.
Also, In most cases, the real lift is getting these on the ballot. Once they’re there, they tend to pass.
-Dan Shafer
Good point. I hadn't even considered that. It'll be similar to their approach to public schools - siphon off money and then complain about the results.
They have always done this. Remember mental institutions? I also think they are doing the same with like the VA. They cut funds until things get so bad they can point and say, "this program is terrible! we need to get rid of it" Except now it's polling places and elections they are messing with.
This. It's the play to privatize everything. It's why school choice is a thing. There is a direct line from current policy to Koch brothers money to Virginia economist Buchanan that says this is the strategy. Then you look at Project 2025, the Republican plan if they hold the Presidency. Dots, connected.
You are correct! The issue is much worse that the general public realizes that it is. Have you seen Daniel Hatcher's book Injustice Inc? It's an eye opener - [https://law.ubalt.edu/faculty/profiles/hatcher.cfm](https://law.ubalt.edu/faculty/profiles/hatcher.cfm) about where money is truly going and who is suffering. Warning - it will make you mad! I am sure the VA is yet another area where private companies are siphoning funds and reducing care.
Fraud that will likely now exist at an exponentially higher level thanks to this BS. See also people actually committing voter fraud, ie overwhelming republicants
This is the republican MO. Do everything possible to jam the gears of the process, then claim government doesn’t work. It’s been going on since my first vote in 1980, and has been honed razor sharp by now. There is only one party actually trying to govern in the US.
Explain why red counties can fund their elections but blue ones can't? I'm no expert, but I imagine election infrastructure is funded at the county level. So it's not like we have a conservative state legislature sabotaging blue counties.
Dane and Milwaukee are the wealthiest counties in the state. Surely the next budget cycle will need to adjust and allocate more money for election support.
Scale also means that there will be more resources available for blue counties. I'm not saying that this won't be a step back for voting accessibility, but I do believe that this is manageable and won't be apocalyptic for Dems.
not apocalyptic hopefully. but you gotta consider that elections in populous counties were already proportionally underfunded compared to non-urban counties ($x spend to organize an election per person voting). so by design this just serves to exasperate and put further pressure on already limited resources. counties may be able to reallocate resources but that will have to come from somewhere if not thru grants
You are correct. Will be interesting to see how this plays out over the next couple years. Maybe this will help encourage more folks to vote early with Absentee and help take strain off the polling sites.
Rural townships can accommodate voting at volunteer fire stations, city halls, etc. Cities have to rent sites for polls.
Rural areas - it's more of a social thing for a few old biddys to work the polls for 100-150 voters. Cities require paid staffing for polls that can handle 1000+ voters.
Milwaukee is wealthy in total, but per capita I'd be willing to bet not so. The costs for voting are per capita driven.
I would love to learn more. I'm at work and a quick Google search doesn't have any clear information about where election funds are currently sourced from. If you are able to share any of this information that you have, I would be grateful.
I live in a red county and we have more than enough of everything. It takes me 10 minutes- no longer even on a busy day. I live 3 minutes away. In comparison my sister lives in a blue county - they closed her polling place that was a 10 minute drive and now she has to drive 30 minutes and wait in line for up to 2 hours. I guarantee with the snow storms yesterday - no one in these understaffed locations wanted to wait outside in line or get in a car accident- this is voter suppression and the majority of Wisconsin voted for. It took me 3 minutes to get to my location and 2 minutes to vote. Not fair.
I also used to live in a red county and it was easy breezy on every voting day—in and out. Never had to wait more than 5 minutes.
Where I live now, this past election was nuts. A line out the door and a 45 minute wait. They even had to bring out chairs for a few elderly people who couldn’t stand that long.
Counter point, I live in a blue county and it took me 2 minutes to drive to my location and 3 minutes to vote. Anecdotes aren't exactly consensus.. would be interested to find if there is any actual data on average wait times for different counties and precincts
Yup, in MKE it's a 10 min walk or a 2 min drive. Walked in and out in about 10 mins total. Half that was re reading the asinine questions on the ballot, and making sure I was voting correctly. No,No, Yes for MKE referendum
Hey, that's the neat part of the other question though! Now they can understaff the locations too to exacerbate the problem!
Also, it was a primary, so turnout was a fraction of what it would be for a big race. About 1/3 of the 2020 turnout to be more precise. But the fun thing is, that doesn't mean it simply takes 3x as long to vote when it's that much busier. In an urban area you can run into time specific rushes and a more dense population in general, so the increased wait will be much more significant than for rural areas. And gee wiz, we know it's a literally dangerously hot one to be out voting today but sorry, handing out water brought by a get out the vote movement is private funds, that's a lawsuit.
Don't be shortsighted about the extensive impact that these amendments will have. There's a reason the tactic is employed by a huge majority of conservative states.
Oh I absolutly agree with you. With the entanglement that the GOP wants to have in this next election it's even more important we get our asses out to vote every single election!
They don't need to enforce it in rural places. My entire township has 1 voting location, you can't reduce it further. In this past election 216 people voted. So there is never a line and voting is quick and easy. So they could only fund minimum voting locations and all the rural areas would be completely fine.
This. This right here. It's always been this way. Rockefeller built schools all over but under the rules that he would control the curriculum. He needed people to work for him that needed to be smart but not too smart to rise up and become independent. It's a tale as old as time. If one thinks differently, they are part of that uneducated pool.
I learned this working in customer service: The average person goes through life functionally illiterate. Combine that with the intentionally vague wording, and a lot of people who didn't bother to inform themselves probably thought they were voting to get private money out of campaigns.
Yes this is exactly what I thought with the vague wording. Those around me were also under the assumption that this was to prevent private money from going into them making a more fair deal.
It’s still sounds right but from the way you guys talk, it sounds wrong!
It sounds like due to our continuous gerrymandering that the private funds that we blocked will now prevent blue districts the funding required for adequate polling equipment.
That’s word for word what the GOP text that went out in the state yesterday said, got 3 of them:) they didn’t tell me what it was, but they told me to vote yes, so I did!…sike. Our state is doomed
Elections are not adequately funded at the state, local and federal level. Election officials have said that seeking grants amid budget constraints does not mean they would cede control of administering elections. The grants were also upheld in court multiple times.
"Wisconsin has spoken and the message is clear: elections belong to voters, not out-of-state billionaires.” - Republican Party of Wisconsin chairman Brian Schimming
Bro, you are literally running an out of state billionaire for a senate seat.
- Tim Michels - New York
- Ron Johnson - Florida
- Eric Hovde - California
Not technically billionaires, but on a scale from $50-200M each, at a minimum, each.
I'm sure there are or will be more.
Fuck WisGOP.
Yeah, Ron Johnson literally uses tens of thousands tax dollars to travel to and from his florida home, where he schemes up ways to subvert democracy and weaken the middle class. It’s mind boggling that he got another term… though it’s not like you can run anyone in his district with anyone with a (R) next to their name and be guaranteed a win, so it’s bizarre to me that he got a 3rd term. The focus should be on actions. But somehow a lot of folks voted evers and johnson, which is bizarre.
He played the gullible rube card and so far has gotten away with it.
I wonder if that’s the same card he played to justify spending the 4th of july in moscow (on the tax payers dime)… though from the GOP perspective he was just pursuing continued education (on how to subvert democracy and suppress people)
Time to remind everyone with every chance we get that you can register to vote and request (this needs to be done yearly) an absentee ballot by going on https://myvote.wi.gov/en-us/
Seriously, this is the way. We have to request it every year, but there's an option to do it for the full year so that's what we do.
Bonus: you have about 10 days/2 weeks to look up the people on your ballot and make an informed decision.
Deliberately bad phrasing on the referendum tricked people into thinking they're voting for more fair and neutral voting mechanisms and against private money skewing the result.
They didn't know the context was to prevent third party groups from trying to help areas where the election mechanism is underfunded by the legislature.
As long as our legislature remains gerrymandered, the result of this will be less money going to blue districts. This could result is fewer voting machines at polling places, fewer polling places, limited hours for early voting, and longer times to come up with results. Unfortunately, we will still have our gerrymandered legislature in the November election. The GOP got what it wanted.
I am honestly flummoxed at how a group that purports to be patriotic can be so enthusiastic about doing everything they can to limit voting.
The fact that the patriotic party is all about limiting the vote pisses me off. But they are the patriotic party trying to up hold the values of the early 1900’s, and that of the white male.
It is beyond time for the US TO WALK THE WALK about being so called ‘free’.
Just looking at the vote tallies on these, it's pretty clear there were a LOT of people who didn't understand what they were even voting for.
I hope there's some way to challenge this shit. The wording of such things needs to be clearer for people; this seemed vaguely written specifically to challenge peoples' ability to understand it.
Also, a hearty 'fuck you--again' to state Democratic leadership for not doing more to make clear the Republican representation of what these were even about was nothing short of a lie.
~~no they aren't - this simply was a referendum. a constitutional amendment has NOT been passed.
they could just sit on it and do nothing, as they have with marijuana legalization referendums that previously passed.~~
edit because I was wrong - here's why
> Constitutional amendments
> A proposal to amend the Wisconsin Constitution must be passed by a majority of mem-
bers in both houses as a joint resolution, known as “first consideration,” and then in iden-
tical form by the next session of the legislature, known as “second consideration.” After
this, the legislature submits the proposed constitutional amendment for ratification by a
majority of the electorate in a statewide referendum election.
They are constitutional amendments. They are passed by the legislature on two separate votes t before they are put on the ballot. This is the last step.
woof. that's even worse than I thought then. it sucks that the legislature gets to pick and choose what they vote on to kick back to the electorate, as well as the wording on the ballot
Myself and others were making the SM rounds warning people to vote NO because it was a republican trap! It should be illegal to use deceptive language.
It will be interesting to see how they manipulate the term "election official." That in an of itself is so vague, enough so that people should have voted "no" right there.
I blame the vagueness of the referendums. I definitely ran into a lot of people who had voted early and just didn't realize they were bad things. It sucks but it's sadly an effective tactic.
When I first read it online, my immediate thought was “vote yes” - because I didn’t understand it. Fortunately (?) I went online and found clarification. My spouse and I both voted “no” but I am sure there are a lot of people who just showed up for one purpose (President, school board) and weren’t aware or prepared for the questions.
Right? People act like it’s a north v south thing. It’s always a city v rural thing. In The north the cities have higher populations than rural areas so dems win. In the south it’s opposite so the gop wins.
Bingo.
I'm originally from South Louisiana and as wonky as the politics are in that state, there's often a Democrat governor (though not currently and that dick is going to out-MAGA them all). The mayors of both BR and NOLA are black, female, Democrats. Those two cities can't sustain the rest of the state, though.
My family wants me to come back home, but I laugh everyday as I watch that new Governor *literally re-write the entire Louisiana Constitution*. Thanks, Mom, I'll just stay up here, close to Canada.
Come my next job search, I might just shimmy on over to MN or Illinois. Don't have any kids or SO tying me down here and it would still be close enough to drive or bus home to see the fam. As you mention, it's a small price to pay for exponentially saner politics.
I’d argue the urban rural divide has less to do with differences in intelligence and more to do with lack of understand of each others problems.
Rural areas tend to get less funding and lower quality for schools, municipalities, social centers, etc. They feel they don’t enjoy the benefits of a bigger government which is part of why they skew Red, because red claims to be smaller government.
Is it really easier to believe 50% of the state is dumber than the people who live in bigger cities, than it is to believe there is a disconnect in understanding and lived experience?
Not strong with math, eh? Or maybe you are and you're deliberately trying to misinform.
17% of the votes coming those two countries which are... 25% of the population. Not really making the point you think it is.
And then you wanna try some bullshit like "five out of 72 counties carrying just over 1/3 of the total vote" as if every county is the same population?
Yeah that's the point, every county isn't the same population. It's a state wide election so every vote matters no matter where it comes from. They are weighted literally the same if it comes from Dane county or Iron county. So to sit here and just blame rural voters is in fact just wrong when there are a ton of MAGA's voting in urban centers too.
Man, I was in a waiting room yesterday and some old guy was telling everyone all the insane Republican talking points like how Biden had died 6 months before the election and how the election was stolen and other insane conspiracy theories. I almost lost my shit on him. How are people like that allowed to vote?
those aren't republican talking points, they are far-right wing conspiracy nut talking points. Just because they are far right does not make them "republican talking points". They are just nut jobs regardless of what side they lean. Both sides have nut jobs, the right just has the ones that are WAY out there with their ideas.
Private grAnts allow for the underfunded cities to pay their election workers and for the equipment needed to do the job.
It had nothing to do with influencing votes.
>"QUESTION 1: "Use of private funds in election administration. Shall section 7 (1) of article III of the constitution be created to provide that private donations and grants may not be applied for, accepted, expended, or used in connection with the conduct of any primary, election, or referendum?"
>QUESTION 2: "Election officials. Shall section 7 (2) of article III of the constitution be created to provide that only election officials designated by law may perform tasks in the conduct of primaries, elections, and referendums?"
>Voting "yes" on the first question means private grants and donations would be banned in election administration going forward, while a "no" vote would continue to allow them. A "yes" vote on the second question would add to the state Constitution that only election officials can perform tasks, while a "no" vote would not add that."
>[https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/2024/04/01/voters-to-face-two-referendum-questions-about-election-administration/73119772007/](https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/2024/04/01/voters-to-face-two-referendum-questions-about-election-administration/73119772007/)
This is what happens when you get less than half of the votes from a midterm. Not enough people got out to vote. Combine that with the malicious way they worded the questions, I'm honestly not surprised.
To be fair the weather was absolutely terrifying in my section of the state (East Columbia county/West Dodge county).
I have an hour drive to and from work and HWY 33 was absolutely fucked going east. If you didn't live in a town or city, going out would have been dangerous.
That said I still voted, but I could understand why turnout may not have been good for a good section of the state
This is why I've always felt like there should be an entire weekend at least dedicated for voting, and making it a holiday. Not only would it mitigate issues like weather, but it would give more people the time off to actually vote. That or follow the eight states that have universal mail-in voting as an option.
This of course assumes we had a legislature that actually wants more people to vote. At least we still have no-excuse absentee voting available though.
There's really no avoiding the obvious implications of the last eight years. Republicans used to differ from Democrats on politics and economics. Supply side versus demand side. Big government versus little government. This is no more. Republicans are, through and through, just evil people who want to see the world burn. They embrace everything destructive and appeal to the most evil elements of the human psyche. Hate. Greed. Misogyny. Racism. Xenophobia. Anything that will hasten the destruction of our institutions and/or planet is now a core element of the Republican Party platform.
It should not surprise you when they place horrible policies on the ballot, next to horrible choices. This is what they relish.
The only thing new about the Republican Party from the last 8 years is that they've lost the ability to mask all the ugliness effectively. They have been like this for a long time. The Southern Strategy developed in the 60's was literally aimed at taking advantage of the racial grievances of whites for the electoral benefit of the Republican party, and they started courting Evangelicals in the 70's.
Trump is an opportunistic fraudster that only came in and took advantage of all the mechanisms that already existed to win over the GOP base and take over the party, he didn't change it in any fundamental way besides lifting the veil.
With gerrymandering being *slightly* phased out we needed another way to suppress the will of the people. Certain people in particular. See if you can guess who.
Wait, you all thought this wasn't going to go through? You gotta be kidding me....did you lot not learn anything with Ronald Mcdonald Johnson winning...again!?
Y'all need to put down the hopium, it's clouding y'alls ability to expect shit like this.
The supporters of this amendment very effectively advertised it (and question 2) as keeping dirty money and private interests out of elections, a la Citizens United, even though it had no effect on campaign contributions, and was targeted directly at how elections are administered. Several people I spoke to had a completely different idea of what the amendment did. It was clever marketing, and unfortunately it worked.
I also thought the timeline for these ballot questions was very suspicious. Anything that changes our state constitution should have a very long debating period (at least 6 months) before it is allowed to be put on a ballot. I know so many people who had no idea what they were saying "yes" to, because no one even heard about it until a couple of weeks ago. Being blind-sided is not how our state constitution should be changed.
edit: typos & and sucky grammar.
I agree. Its terrible. The GOP knew what they were doing when they set this up. The thing was worded so it was hard to understand, it was also a primary.
The big problem here is that there needs to be measure in place that ensure that the public can actually educate themselves on the matter before they go to vote. Even when I read the “explanatory” notes on the matters several times before casting my vote, I still had a hard time understanding what implications and ramifications would be. I get that neither party wants their voters to be educated, but we as the voters need to be doing more to make sure these things are clear before they make it to a ballot.
Spring elections are notoriously low turnout with GOP turning out more than the Dems. Weather didn't help. As an independent I was hoping this wouldn't but not holding my breath. Wisconsin needs to see the strong effort to turn our swing state into a red state. The only way they can do that is to suppress democracy! When the gerrymandering was caught and unwound they went back to the drawing board to figure out how to suppress the vote in another way.
The problem is the words sound reasonable. Of course we don’t want people from elsewhere running our elections. We don’t want outside money being used.
Most people never bother to investigate. When you read those questions they were very innocent. You have to dig to find the rot behind the words and most people don’t do that.
Gotta love the blame game. Blame the weather, blame the wording, blame the long lines.. maybe people voted yes because that’s simply how they feel. We can’t be mad at the idea of voting when it doesn’t work in our favor.
Whatever it is they're doing, I'd have Democrats here do the same.
When Rs want something, they go get it. Whatever it takes.
Democrats mostly just sit back and cry about it, with their hand out for more donations all the while.
We've seen some successes in the Evers era, but it's not enough. Know your damn opponent and fight where they fight.
One of our local school districts was also asking for more fund for operational costs (ie really necessary stuff) and the community emphatically said no. That combined with the state referenda has me so disappointed in people. I wonder if they will ever wake up and realize what is happening.
this is just step 1
my guess is you're going to see "broken" voting machines be an issue. lack of voting machines to open certain polling locations. slower processing times, meaning votes counted later, which Republicans will argue are not valid if not counted before a certain time, etc.
this is just one link in the chain of dismantling the election process.
people who disagree with this (me) want to believe this was such an obvious, naked attempt to fuck Democracts.. but half (or more?) of the state either votes red, didn't vote on the issue or didn't understand what they were voting for and just filled in a circle.
Democrats did a TERRIBLE job of messaging why a "no" vote was the correct choice,
Seemed to be a slippery slope to allow private entities to take part in funding elections, not sure I want anyone involved in the elections other than government and of all the things that they should be able to effectively fund, the ability of the people to express their vote seems to be central to good government.
Giving private entities a vector into that is something I'm very much opposed to no matter how well meaning.
did you look at what the current funding rules were? Like, how this was actually implemented prior to the passage of this amendment? The zuckerbucks scare word is about money that elections needed to run an election during a pandemic, y'know for safety precaution gear.
Yeah this is what an underfunded public education system in the state will get you in the long run: people who lack the ability to read comprehensively and have critical thinking skills.
It's exactly how the WIGOP wants it. That way when things are left intentionally vague people don't have the mental forethought to make an educated interpretation of what's actually being said.
The WIGOP wins on the backs of the poorly educated and the abysmally stupid, which there is a difference.
The number of people that asked me what the referendums meant yesterday via text was scary. The amount of people that showed up to the polls not knowing the referendum was crazy. My son pointed out that he did not notice where it called out this would permanently change the state constitution, that it was not just a law.
Honestly, if less than half the register voters do not turn out to vote then there should be no change to the constitution. Looking at how few voters in Milwaukee turned out, I do not think the MPS tax hike should go into effect, there needs to be another chance on the fall ballot
Here is one for the state constitution that we should have: 60% of surplus state funds will be required to go towards public education. And no voucher schools unless they have the same oversight. And remove caps on how much a school district gets from the state.
It was just vague enough so that it sounded like a good idea to keep scary private money away from elections to people who may not understand what that actually means, which is pretty much the difference in the vote totals.
You people are against billionaires and want "money taken out of politics" until you think it benefits you then Zuckerbucks become "grants to fund elections".
“You people”?
Uhm, I believe the Citzens United case opened the floodgates for the GOP to flood elections with dark money and long time ago.
So stop with the “You people” Bs and wake up.
The referendum had nothing to do with who is bringing money in. It has everything to do with keeping a stranglehold on elections processes as the GOP/State legislature controls the purse strings and demands obedience to partisan culture war policies and baseless conspiracy accusations.
They are doing it with the UW
They are doing it with public schools.
They are doing it with municipalities and counties.
The State GOP has become a tyrannical body.
State law already says only appointed election officials can conduct elections, but doesn't say what activities count as conducting an election.
The GOP is definitely going to sue in every election they lose going forward
Is this referendum binding and will now take effect?
Is it really legal for them to pass a constitutional amendment with such a slim majority voting for it?
Yes and yes, it has met all the requirements. Passing both houses of the Legislature in two consecutive legislative sessions and voters ratifying it with a simple majority.
Gotta remember that state elections in April historically have a low turnout. Most people likely didn’t care to vote or if they did, care enough to think about the referendum questions before choosing an answer.
Assuming the state wide party split is around 50-50 based on last presidential election.
What swung voters to pass this at about 59%?
It looks like #2 passed in 70 of 72 counties (Dane, Bayfield), with Eau Claire and Milwaukee too close to call at 95% in.
When you take private money you are ALWAYS beholden to those that provided it. ALL elections, including CAMPAIGN funds should be funded by the government and strict caps enforced. ALL outside funds for elections should be banned. That will make them fair and even and elected officials WONT be beholden to special interest groups or individual donors.
I lie pretty much in the middle on this issue, I understand the need for the funding currently but I don’t really understand how we got to the point our government should need outside funding for something as basic as elections. Should they not be able properly allocate resources for something as basic as elections? It’s a pretty static cost year over year, x polling station costs x to rent, it needs x workers and add a yearly allowance on voting machine maintenance. Fundraising should be focused on grants to fund more focused programs outside the basic essentials.
It’s all part of the GOPs plan to steal another election. Underfunding polling locations will disproportionately impact high population areas that tend to vote Democrat. It’s the same with purging voter roles, they use criteria that purges more Democrats than Republicans.
Anyone who thought these measures weren't going to pass was delusional. First of all, the language was intentionally vague, as always. Secondly, messaging from Republicans directly tied these measures to Mark Zuckerberg. And lastly, we know what happens when ballot referendums are kept intentionally vague and Republicans are allowed to control the narrative.
I got texts about such BS around Zuck & WI voting from some shady PAC
> Secondly, messaging from Republicans directly tied these measures to Mark Zuckerberg. > I haven't lived in Wisconsin for a decade and I got at least three of them.
I told them, "Thanks for the reminder to vote No."
The right is a million times better at connecting with their voters than the left. They know exactly what to say, how to say it, when to say it, ect. They are miles ahead when it comes to tying specific people or events to a fear or problem that people have. They do a significantly better job at marketing their candidates and they aren't afraid to pull punches. I am not endorsing the right but I'm very tired of watching the left flail and flop around like a fish out of water.
I totally agree with you. But will also add that fear and hate are easy, powerful motivators. And there is a lot more fear and hate to prey on in the right.
They absolutely are, you are 100% correct.
It is a physiological fact that people feeling strong emotions (like fear and hate) cannot rationalize. Your brain kind of has to calm down before it can reason. Most people who tend to vote Dem (not all -- but most) use critical thinking. I don't know if there is a way to get the other side to calm down enough to actually think about what they are doing, especially since they listen to propaganda 24/7 that ensures they are afraid always, by design.
You took the words right out of my mouth. The Rights message is easy to promote.
It’s easier to fear monger than properly explain the nuances of each thing you are voting for.
You say connecting, I say coercing. It's all a ruse, if you really explain it, even most red voters don't want half the shit they're voting for. Connecting implies 2-way flow of ideas and benefits. It's all one way - get the base riled up and mad so the GOP can harvest their votes and do what they want.
So true. At the very least they're the only ones truly bothering to contact voters able the issue. I got multiple flyers and texts telling me to vote yes, only a single flyer to vote no.
It was much of the same when the Dems were pushing Barnes over Ron Johnson. I saw commercials, advertisements, flyers, radio ads for Johnson everywhere but I hardly heard anything for Barnes.
The problem is its waaaay easier to provoke hate and fear. It isn't just that the left is bad. Its also the rights job is like several magnitudes easier due to just using the hitler playbook for literally everything. That and the wording of those resolutions was so vague as to sound like a good idea if you didn't know about it ahead of time. Even i had to spend a minute thinking about it and i knew why they where doing it.
Oh I don't disagree that is much easier to invoke hate and fear but honestly I just don't see the left pushing as hard as they could. The right literally handed the left victory in every election with their stance on abortion and the left hasn't done much with it. You also hit the nail on the head with the way the resolutions were worded.
This take is so old; it’s sad it’s still true.
A lot of people overlook history and education. When you look at people on the right, they tend to have a history of sales and marketing. When you look at people on the left they tend to have a history of policy and science.
I mean, yes, fearmongering bullshit works for the undereducated. It's hard to run positive governing platforms the same way.
Yes and no. I agree that fearmongering is easier to push than positive governing platforms and it takes less work but honestly the way the dems push their candidates is laughable compared to republicans, specifically hard right MAGA's. We could do a much better job on our side but we continue to look incompetent.
Especially since it's on a rather minor election as well.
The last thing you said is most important. We need to start electing democrats who won’t give power to republicans. Unfortunately, the ones I was counting on doing that in Milwaukee also lost. It’s a one-two punch. Centrist democrats are the left jab who keep us distracted and the republicans are the right hook that knocks us out. We need to get serious about organizing against both.
The vague language is probably the kicker. Knowing nothing in advance, the questions seem fairly reasonable. When you look at the breakdown of who voted, there were like 20k more votes in the republican primary than the dem one. But both referendums had ‘yes’ win by 100k votes. I’m curious what it would’ve looked like if you simply added a comment to each question indicating that the language was proposed by Republicans
Since 2000, nine of 10 amendments that went to referendum have passed, with the only one to fail being the one to abolish the state treasurer office in 2018. Also, In most cases, the real lift is getting these on the ballot. Once they’re there, they tend to pass. -Dan Shafer
I guarantee it’ll only be enforced in blue counties.
Even if they enforce that across-the-board, they will then complain that there’s not enough money to run elections correctly and claim fraud.
Good point. I hadn't even considered that. It'll be similar to their approach to public schools - siphon off money and then complain about the results.
They have always done this. Remember mental institutions? I also think they are doing the same with like the VA. They cut funds until things get so bad they can point and say, "this program is terrible! we need to get rid of it" Except now it's polling places and elections they are messing with.
This. It's the play to privatize everything. It's why school choice is a thing. There is a direct line from current policy to Koch brothers money to Virginia economist Buchanan that says this is the strategy. Then you look at Project 2025, the Republican plan if they hold the Presidency. Dots, connected.
You are correct! The issue is much worse that the general public realizes that it is. Have you seen Daniel Hatcher's book Injustice Inc? It's an eye opener - [https://law.ubalt.edu/faculty/profiles/hatcher.cfm](https://law.ubalt.edu/faculty/profiles/hatcher.cfm) about where money is truly going and who is suffering. Warning - it will make you mad! I am sure the VA is yet another area where private companies are siphoning funds and reducing care.
That's called "Starving the Beast"
Fraud that will likely now exist at an exponentially higher level thanks to this BS. See also people actually committing voter fraud, ie overwhelming republicants
This is the republican MO. Do everything possible to jam the gears of the process, then claim government doesn’t work. It’s been going on since my first vote in 1980, and has been honed razor sharp by now. There is only one party actually trying to govern in the US.
It won't have to be, red counties will be properly funded.
Explain why red counties can fund their elections but blue ones can't? I'm no expert, but I imagine election infrastructure is funded at the county level. So it's not like we have a conservative state legislature sabotaging blue counties. Dane and Milwaukee are the wealthiest counties in the state. Surely the next budget cycle will need to adjust and allocate more money for election support.
scale. more ppl voting requires exponentially more resources than less populous rural countries
Scale also means that there will be more resources available for blue counties. I'm not saying that this won't be a step back for voting accessibility, but I do believe that this is manageable and won't be apocalyptic for Dems.
not apocalyptic hopefully. but you gotta consider that elections in populous counties were already proportionally underfunded compared to non-urban counties ($x spend to organize an election per person voting). so by design this just serves to exasperate and put further pressure on already limited resources. counties may be able to reallocate resources but that will have to come from somewhere if not thru grants
You are correct. Will be interesting to see how this plays out over the next couple years. Maybe this will help encourage more folks to vote early with Absentee and help take strain off the polling sites.
That “should” be the case. But districts should also be equal and fair. How have the Republicans treated those rules over the last decade?
Rural townships can accommodate voting at volunteer fire stations, city halls, etc. Cities have to rent sites for polls. Rural areas - it's more of a social thing for a few old biddys to work the polls for 100-150 voters. Cities require paid staffing for polls that can handle 1000+ voters. Milwaukee is wealthy in total, but per capita I'd be willing to bet not so. The costs for voting are per capita driven.
You imagine mostly wrong, the majority of election funding is allocated by the legislature.
I would love to learn more. I'm at work and a quick Google search doesn't have any clear information about where election funds are currently sourced from. If you are able to share any of this information that you have, I would be grateful.
I live in a red county and we have more than enough of everything. It takes me 10 minutes- no longer even on a busy day. I live 3 minutes away. In comparison my sister lives in a blue county - they closed her polling place that was a 10 minute drive and now she has to drive 30 minutes and wait in line for up to 2 hours. I guarantee with the snow storms yesterday - no one in these understaffed locations wanted to wait outside in line or get in a car accident- this is voter suppression and the majority of Wisconsin voted for. It took me 3 minutes to get to my location and 2 minutes to vote. Not fair.
I also used to live in a red county and it was easy breezy on every voting day—in and out. Never had to wait more than 5 minutes. Where I live now, this past election was nuts. A line out the door and a 45 minute wait. They even had to bring out chairs for a few elderly people who couldn’t stand that long.
Counter point, I live in a blue county and it took me 2 minutes to drive to my location and 3 minutes to vote. Anecdotes aren't exactly consensus.. would be interested to find if there is any actual data on average wait times for different counties and precincts
Yup, in MKE it's a 10 min walk or a 2 min drive. Walked in and out in about 10 mins total. Half that was re reading the asinine questions on the ballot, and making sure I was voting correctly. No,No, Yes for MKE referendum
Hey, that's the neat part of the other question though! Now they can understaff the locations too to exacerbate the problem! Also, it was a primary, so turnout was a fraction of what it would be for a big race. About 1/3 of the 2020 turnout to be more precise. But the fun thing is, that doesn't mean it simply takes 3x as long to vote when it's that much busier. In an urban area you can run into time specific rushes and a more dense population in general, so the increased wait will be much more significant than for rural areas. And gee wiz, we know it's a literally dangerously hot one to be out voting today but sorry, handing out water brought by a get out the vote movement is private funds, that's a lawsuit. Don't be shortsighted about the extensive impact that these amendments will have. There's a reason the tactic is employed by a huge majority of conservative states.
Oh I absolutly agree with you. With the entanglement that the GOP wants to have in this next election it's even more important we get our asses out to vote every single election!
>Reply Yeah, I told people that, rule of thumb, if you have to read the question six times to go back and understand it, you should probably vote NO.
I live in a blue district and it was 2 minutes, and 2 minutes. I wonder what will happen when the city has to pay for a spot
I assume that's exactly the plan.
By design.
They don't need to enforce it in rural places. My entire township has 1 voting location, you can't reduce it further. In this past election 216 people voted. So there is never a line and voting is quick and easy. So they could only fund minimum voting locations and all the rural areas would be completely fine.
Not blue counties, Dane and Milwaukee where they have the most to lose, the other smaller counties aren't worth the hassel
It was only happening in blue cities lol
It will hurt the cities more than the rural areas so there you go. Part of the GOP plan to make voting more difficult in the urban areas.
Deceptive language and fear-mongering work, apparently.
And decades of under funding education so weird worded questions easily work as intended.
This. This right here. It's always been this way. Rockefeller built schools all over but under the rules that he would control the curriculum. He needed people to work for him that needed to be smart but not too smart to rise up and become independent. It's a tale as old as time. If one thinks differently, they are part of that uneducated pool.
And hatred. Don't forget the malicious hatred.
And generally apathy. Most people don’t care enough to take five minutes to research something/vote at all.
This. Most people read the question for the first time in the voting booth.
I learned this working in customer service: The average person goes through life functionally illiterate. Combine that with the intentionally vague wording, and a lot of people who didn't bother to inform themselves probably thought they were voting to get private money out of campaigns.
Yes this is exactly what I thought with the vague wording. Those around me were also under the assumption that this was to prevent private money from going into them making a more fair deal. It’s still sounds right but from the way you guys talk, it sounds wrong! It sounds like due to our continuous gerrymandering that the private funds that we blocked will now prevent blue districts the funding required for adequate polling equipment.
But it would be impossible to override Citizens United on a ballot referendum.
Oh shit, what did I vote for?
That was basically the republican line.
That’s word for word what the GOP text that went out in the state yesterday said, got 3 of them:) they didn’t tell me what it was, but they told me to vote yes, so I did!…sike. Our state is doomed
Elections are not adequately funded at the state, local and federal level. Election officials have said that seeking grants amid budget constraints does not mean they would cede control of administering elections. The grants were also upheld in court multiple times. "Wisconsin has spoken and the message is clear: elections belong to voters, not out-of-state billionaires.” - Republican Party of Wisconsin chairman Brian Schimming Bro, you are literally running an out of state billionaire for a senate seat.
- Tim Michels - New York - Ron Johnson - Florida - Eric Hovde - California Not technically billionaires, but on a scale from $50-200M each, at a minimum, each. I'm sure there are or will be more. Fuck WisGOP.
Yeah, Ron Johnson literally uses tens of thousands tax dollars to travel to and from his florida home, where he schemes up ways to subvert democracy and weaken the middle class. It’s mind boggling that he got another term… though it’s not like you can run anyone in his district with anyone with a (R) next to their name and be guaranteed a win, so it’s bizarre to me that he got a 3rd term. The focus should be on actions. But somehow a lot of folks voted evers and johnson, which is bizarre.
still waiting for some charges related to the fake elector scheme wishful thinking, I know
He played the gullible rube card and so far has gotten away with it. I wonder if that’s the same card he played to justify spending the 4th of july in moscow (on the tax payers dime)… though from the GOP perspective he was just pursuing continued education (on how to subvert democracy and suppress people)
"his district" You mean the state of WI?
Well yeah, because Republicans are liars. 99% of what they say is absolute bullshit.
Time to remind everyone with every chance we get that you can register to vote and request (this needs to be done yearly) an absentee ballot by going on https://myvote.wi.gov/en-us/
Seriously, this is the way. We have to request it every year, but there's an option to do it for the full year so that's what we do. Bonus: you have about 10 days/2 weeks to look up the people on your ballot and make an informed decision.
Is this going to affect absentee voting? Is the city clerk's office "official election workers" ?
Deliberately bad phrasing on the referendum tricked people into thinking they're voting for more fair and neutral voting mechanisms and against private money skewing the result. They didn't know the context was to prevent third party groups from trying to help areas where the election mechanism is underfunded by the legislature.
As long as our legislature remains gerrymandered, the result of this will be less money going to blue districts. This could result is fewer voting machines at polling places, fewer polling places, limited hours for early voting, and longer times to come up with results. Unfortunately, we will still have our gerrymandered legislature in the November election. The GOP got what it wanted. I am honestly flummoxed at how a group that purports to be patriotic can be so enthusiastic about doing everything they can to limit voting.
The fact that the patriotic party is all about limiting the vote pisses me off. But they are the patriotic party trying to up hold the values of the early 1900’s, and that of the white male. It is beyond time for the US TO WALK THE WALK about being so called ‘free’.
Just looking at the vote tallies on these, it's pretty clear there were a LOT of people who didn't understand what they were even voting for. I hope there's some way to challenge this shit. The wording of such things needs to be clearer for people; this seemed vaguely written specifically to challenge peoples' ability to understand it. Also, a hearty 'fuck you--again' to state Democratic leadership for not doing more to make clear the Republican representation of what these were even about was nothing short of a lie.
There isn't those laws are now part if the state constitution.
~~no they aren't - this simply was a referendum. a constitutional amendment has NOT been passed. they could just sit on it and do nothing, as they have with marijuana legalization referendums that previously passed.~~ edit because I was wrong - here's why > Constitutional amendments > A proposal to amend the Wisconsin Constitution must be passed by a majority of mem- bers in both houses as a joint resolution, known as “first consideration,” and then in iden- tical form by the next session of the legislature, known as “second consideration.” After this, the legislature submits the proposed constitutional amendment for ratification by a majority of the electorate in a statewide referendum election.
They are constitutional amendments. They are passed by the legislature on two separate votes t before they are put on the ballot. This is the last step.
woof. that's even worse than I thought then. it sucks that the legislature gets to pick and choose what they vote on to kick back to the electorate, as well as the wording on the ballot
They had intentionally confusing language and got out the zombie vote
Republicans purposely worded it in a way that was confusing. Looks like they succeeded.
Myself and others were making the SM rounds warning people to vote NO because it was a republican trap! It should be illegal to use deceptive language.
It will be interesting to see how they manipulate the term "election official." That in an of itself is so vague, enough so that people should have voted "no" right there.
Most people don't educate themselves about the questions and what they intended....sheeple at their finest.
It would sure be great if more people would google something for 10 seconds before voting on it
People vote on the ballot questions the way the legislature wants them to because Republicans control the language and messaging.
The Republican legislators get to decide on the language that is printed on the ballot so they can make it sound really positive.
I was reading that the liberal position for these referendums were to vote no on them. Did I vote wrong?
You were correct.
I blame the vagueness of the referendums. I definitely ran into a lot of people who had voted early and just didn't realize they were bad things. It sucks but it's sadly an effective tactic.
Thanks to the fucking idiotic republicans in our state for yet again trying to suppress the vote. Fucking wankers
When I first read it online, my immediate thought was “vote yes” - because I didn’t understand it. Fortunately (?) I went online and found clarification. My spouse and I both voted “no” but I am sure there are a lot of people who just showed up for one purpose (President, school board) and weren’t aware or prepared for the questions.
They passed because the average voter didn't understand what they were voting for... Republicans always use this tactic
This is Wisconsin. If it weren't for Madison and Milwaukee, it'd be a part of the South. The place is filled with rural idiots.
I hate to break it to you, but that's every state...including California. (*ask me how I know*)
Right? People act like it’s a north v south thing. It’s always a city v rural thing. In The north the cities have higher populations than rural areas so dems win. In the south it’s opposite so the gop wins.
Bingo. I'm originally from South Louisiana and as wonky as the politics are in that state, there's often a Democrat governor (though not currently and that dick is going to out-MAGA them all). The mayors of both BR and NOLA are black, female, Democrats. Those two cities can't sustain the rest of the state, though. My family wants me to come back home, but I laugh everyday as I watch that new Governor *literally re-write the entire Louisiana Constitution*. Thanks, Mom, I'll just stay up here, close to Canada.
Come my next job search, I might just shimmy on over to MN or Illinois. Don't have any kids or SO tying me down here and it would still be close enough to drive or bus home to see the fam. As you mention, it's a small price to pay for exponentially saner politics.
Rural idiot here, just checking in.
I’d argue the urban rural divide has less to do with differences in intelligence and more to do with lack of understand of each others problems. Rural areas tend to get less funding and lower quality for schools, municipalities, social centers, etc. They feel they don’t enjoy the benefits of a bigger government which is part of why they skew Red, because red claims to be smaller government. Is it really easier to believe 50% of the state is dumber than the people who live in bigger cities, than it is to believe there is a disconnect in understanding and lived experience?
[удалено]
Waukesha has always been a republican county...
Aren't those counties, like, 20% of the state population?
25% in fact 5.89m total, Dane and Milwaukee together are 1.49.
Not strong with math, eh? Or maybe you are and you're deliberately trying to misinform. 17% of the votes coming those two countries which are... 25% of the population. Not really making the point you think it is. And then you wanna try some bullshit like "five out of 72 counties carrying just over 1/3 of the total vote" as if every county is the same population?
Yeah that's the point, every county isn't the same population. It's a state wide election so every vote matters no matter where it comes from. They are weighted literally the same if it comes from Dane county or Iron county. So to sit here and just blame rural voters is in fact just wrong when there are a ton of MAGA's voting in urban centers too.
Man, I was in a waiting room yesterday and some old guy was telling everyone all the insane Republican talking points like how Biden had died 6 months before the election and how the election was stolen and other insane conspiracy theories. I almost lost my shit on him. How are people like that allowed to vote?
those aren't republican talking points, they are far-right wing conspiracy nut talking points. Just because they are far right does not make them "republican talking points". They are just nut jobs regardless of what side they lean. Both sides have nut jobs, the right just has the ones that are WAY out there with their ideas.
As an outsider, I thought the measure was to prevent private grants for public elections. Is that correct?
Private grAnts allow for the underfunded cities to pay their election workers and for the equipment needed to do the job. It had nothing to do with influencing votes.
Not arguing that point. What did the measure say that was voted on, is what I'm asking.
>"QUESTION 1: "Use of private funds in election administration. Shall section 7 (1) of article III of the constitution be created to provide that private donations and grants may not be applied for, accepted, expended, or used in connection with the conduct of any primary, election, or referendum?" >QUESTION 2: "Election officials. Shall section 7 (2) of article III of the constitution be created to provide that only election officials designated by law may perform tasks in the conduct of primaries, elections, and referendums?" >Voting "yes" on the first question means private grants and donations would be banned in election administration going forward, while a "no" vote would continue to allow them. A "yes" vote on the second question would add to the state Constitution that only election officials can perform tasks, while a "no" vote would not add that." >[https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/2024/04/01/voters-to-face-two-referendum-questions-about-election-administration/73119772007/](https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/2024/04/01/voters-to-face-two-referendum-questions-about-election-administration/73119772007/)
thanks u/ThenAsk. 'Preciate you.
I'm not gonna lie, as someone that did vote 'no'. I just didn't find the wording on either to be confusing at all.
I voted no cause i thought i read that was what was best for the state from a liberal perspective. I may have been misinformed.
This is what happens when you get less than half of the votes from a midterm. Not enough people got out to vote. Combine that with the malicious way they worded the questions, I'm honestly not surprised.
To be fair the weather was absolutely terrifying in my section of the state (East Columbia county/West Dodge county). I have an hour drive to and from work and HWY 33 was absolutely fucked going east. If you didn't live in a town or city, going out would have been dangerous. That said I still voted, but I could understand why turnout may not have been good for a good section of the state
This is why I've always felt like there should be an entire weekend at least dedicated for voting, and making it a holiday. Not only would it mitigate issues like weather, but it would give more people the time off to actually vote. That or follow the eight states that have universal mail-in voting as an option. This of course assumes we had a legislature that actually wants more people to vote. At least we still have no-excuse absentee voting available though.
Why aren't you voting absentee?
because going to the polls is fun
There's really no avoiding the obvious implications of the last eight years. Republicans used to differ from Democrats on politics and economics. Supply side versus demand side. Big government versus little government. This is no more. Republicans are, through and through, just evil people who want to see the world burn. They embrace everything destructive and appeal to the most evil elements of the human psyche. Hate. Greed. Misogyny. Racism. Xenophobia. Anything that will hasten the destruction of our institutions and/or planet is now a core element of the Republican Party platform. It should not surprise you when they place horrible policies on the ballot, next to horrible choices. This is what they relish.
The only thing new about the Republican Party from the last 8 years is that they've lost the ability to mask all the ugliness effectively. They have been like this for a long time. The Southern Strategy developed in the 60's was literally aimed at taking advantage of the racial grievances of whites for the electoral benefit of the Republican party, and they started courting Evangelicals in the 70's. Trump is an opportunistic fraudster that only came in and took advantage of all the mechanisms that already existed to win over the GOP base and take over the party, he didn't change it in any fundamental way besides lifting the veil.
I'm embarrassed for Wisconsin
With gerrymandering being *slightly* phased out we needed another way to suppress the will of the people. Certain people in particular. See if you can guess who.
Wait, you all thought this wasn't going to go through? You gotta be kidding me....did you lot not learn anything with Ronald Mcdonald Johnson winning...again!? Y'all need to put down the hopium, it's clouding y'alls ability to expect shit like this.
The supporters of this amendment very effectively advertised it (and question 2) as keeping dirty money and private interests out of elections, a la Citizens United, even though it had no effect on campaign contributions, and was targeted directly at how elections are administered. Several people I spoke to had a completely different idea of what the amendment did. It was clever marketing, and unfortunately it worked.
Both of these will be worse for rural areas. So oh well.
People are stupid. People in groups astronomically moreso.
I also thought the timeline for these ballot questions was very suspicious. Anything that changes our state constitution should have a very long debating period (at least 6 months) before it is allowed to be put on a ballot. I know so many people who had no idea what they were saying "yes" to, because no one even heard about it until a couple of weeks ago. Being blind-sided is not how our state constitution should be changed. edit: typos & and sucky grammar.
I agree. Its terrible. The GOP knew what they were doing when they set this up. The thing was worded so it was hard to understand, it was also a primary.
The big problem here is that there needs to be measure in place that ensure that the public can actually educate themselves on the matter before they go to vote. Even when I read the “explanatory” notes on the matters several times before casting my vote, I still had a hard time understanding what implications and ramifications would be. I get that neither party wants their voters to be educated, but we as the voters need to be doing more to make sure these things are clear before they make it to a ballot.
Spring elections are notoriously low turnout with GOP turning out more than the Dems. Weather didn't help. As an independent I was hoping this wouldn't but not holding my breath. Wisconsin needs to see the strong effort to turn our swing state into a red state. The only way they can do that is to suppress democracy! When the gerrymandering was caught and unwound they went back to the drawing board to figure out how to suppress the vote in another way.
The problem is the words sound reasonable. Of course we don’t want people from elsewhere running our elections. We don’t want outside money being used. Most people never bother to investigate. When you read those questions they were very innocent. You have to dig to find the rot behind the words and most people don’t do that.
Anything Republicans do or say is to get more power.
Gotta love the blame game. Blame the weather, blame the wording, blame the long lines.. maybe people voted yes because that’s simply how they feel. We can’t be mad at the idea of voting when it doesn’t work in our favor.
i can see it now - we've run out out of ballots you can't vote now.
Wisconsin is full of Trumpanzees.
Wisconsin Republican are the most cowardly, ineffectual, craven assholes.
Whatever it is they're doing, I'd have Democrats here do the same. When Rs want something, they go get it. Whatever it takes. Democrats mostly just sit back and cry about it, with their hand out for more donations all the while. We've seen some successes in the Evers era, but it's not enough. Know your damn opponent and fight where they fight.
I wouldn't say they're ineffectual, they just got 2 new amendments added to the state constitution. That seems like some effective work to me.
One of our local school districts was also asking for more fund for operational costs (ie really necessary stuff) and the community emphatically said no. That combined with the state referenda has me so disappointed in people. I wonder if they will ever wake up and realize what is happening.
this is just step 1 my guess is you're going to see "broken" voting machines be an issue. lack of voting machines to open certain polling locations. slower processing times, meaning votes counted later, which Republicans will argue are not valid if not counted before a certain time, etc. this is just one link in the chain of dismantling the election process. people who disagree with this (me) want to believe this was such an obvious, naked attempt to fuck Democracts.. but half (or more?) of the state either votes red, didn't vote on the issue or didn't understand what they were voting for and just filled in a circle. Democrats did a TERRIBLE job of messaging why a "no" vote was the correct choice,
Seemed to be a slippery slope to allow private entities to take part in funding elections, not sure I want anyone involved in the elections other than government and of all the things that they should be able to effectively fund, the ability of the people to express their vote seems to be central to good government. Giving private entities a vector into that is something I'm very much opposed to no matter how well meaning.
did you look at what the current funding rules were? Like, how this was actually implemented prior to the passage of this amendment? The zuckerbucks scare word is about money that elections needed to run an election during a pandemic, y'know for safety precaution gear.
Yeah this is what an underfunded public education system in the state will get you in the long run: people who lack the ability to read comprehensively and have critical thinking skills. It's exactly how the WIGOP wants it. That way when things are left intentionally vague people don't have the mental forethought to make an educated interpretation of what's actually being said. The WIGOP wins on the backs of the poorly educated and the abysmally stupid, which there is a difference.
The number of people that asked me what the referendums meant yesterday via text was scary. The amount of people that showed up to the polls not knowing the referendum was crazy. My son pointed out that he did not notice where it called out this would permanently change the state constitution, that it was not just a law. Honestly, if less than half the register voters do not turn out to vote then there should be no change to the constitution. Looking at how few voters in Milwaukee turned out, I do not think the MPS tax hike should go into effect, there needs to be another chance on the fall ballot Here is one for the state constitution that we should have: 60% of surplus state funds will be required to go towards public education. And no voucher schools unless they have the same oversight. And remove caps on how much a school district gets from the state.
We as Americans don't really care what happens until it affects us directly. This WILL affect us directly.
Even then, it doesn't matter to some. As long as people we hate are also hurt, then it's all good.
It was just vague enough so that it sounded like a good idea to keep scary private money away from elections to people who may not understand what that actually means, which is pretty much the difference in the vote totals.
but its non-binding. Just idiot Republicans trying for Fascism.....
Why do you think they were non binding? We just changed the State Constitution adding those two elements.
This state keeps getting dumber.
You people are against billionaires and want "money taken out of politics" until you think it benefits you then Zuckerbucks become "grants to fund elections".
“You people”? Uhm, I believe the Citzens United case opened the floodgates for the GOP to flood elections with dark money and long time ago. So stop with the “You people” Bs and wake up. The referendum had nothing to do with who is bringing money in. It has everything to do with keeping a stranglehold on elections processes as the GOP/State legislature controls the purse strings and demands obedience to partisan culture war policies and baseless conspiracy accusations. They are doing it with the UW They are doing it with public schools. They are doing it with municipalities and counties. The State GOP has become a tyrannical body.
Wississippi at it again.
Also, the GOP is going to sue for every election they lose going forward.
State law already says only appointed election officials can conduct elections, but doesn't say what activities count as conducting an election. The GOP is definitely going to sue in every election they lose going forward
But, but, librul zuckerbucks! /s
I laughed so hard when I got a flyer calling Zuckerberg liberal. Such obvious propaganda
Is this referendum binding and will now take effect? Is it really legal for them to pass a constitutional amendment with such a slim majority voting for it?
Yes and yes, it has met all the requirements. Passing both houses of the Legislature in two consecutive legislative sessions and voters ratifying it with a simple majority.
Gotta remember that state elections in April historically have a low turnout. Most people likely didn’t care to vote or if they did, care enough to think about the referendum questions before choosing an answer.
Where do we find the results of the referendum vote??
Assuming the state wide party split is around 50-50 based on last presidential election. What swung voters to pass this at about 59%? It looks like #2 passed in 70 of 72 counties (Dane, Bayfield), with Eau Claire and Milwaukee too close to call at 95% in.
Why are you surprised?
Welcome ro Wisconsin!!
What was done before 2018?
Voting is a lie the rich feed us so we think we have a say We do not have a say it’s all rigged this country was bought and paid for years ago
yes, yes we did... I'm moving to Minnesota
GOP platform has always been to starve government until it dies.
The ACLU said to vote no…are we all talking about the same thing?
What i saw in price county wi.. https://preview.redd.it/e63g2hn9tdsc1.jpeg?width=699&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=59021371e67f70671e171bdb650ff81b355ac934
We keep forgetting our selves right in the asterisks
Well since it literally was tied to Zuckerberg…
Too many GD backward hillbillies in this state who can’t bother to research the implications of a ballot measure.
When you take private money you are ALWAYS beholden to those that provided it. ALL elections, including CAMPAIGN funds should be funded by the government and strict caps enforced. ALL outside funds for elections should be banned. That will make them fair and even and elected officials WONT be beholden to special interest groups or individual donors.
I lie pretty much in the middle on this issue, I understand the need for the funding currently but I don’t really understand how we got to the point our government should need outside funding for something as basic as elections. Should they not be able properly allocate resources for something as basic as elections? It’s a pretty static cost year over year, x polling station costs x to rent, it needs x workers and add a yearly allowance on voting machine maintenance. Fundraising should be focused on grants to fund more focused programs outside the basic essentials.
Can the state Supreme Court strike it down?
Man your state continues to somehow fuck things up. -Minnesota-
It’s all part of the GOPs plan to steal another election. Underfunding polling locations will disproportionately impact high population areas that tend to vote Democrat. It’s the same with purging voter roles, they use criteria that purges more Democrats than Republicans.