Wisconsin Democrats Try to Create New Constitutional Qualification to Vote without Amending State Constitution

Democrats: Vote and Go to Jail; New Shite Show

Commentary

Madison, Wisconsin—Wisconsin Democrats in the Wisconsin Elections Commission have issued decree that Wisconsin law creates a new qualification to vote supplanting Wisconsin Constitution without amending the Wisconsin Constitution.

"With prediction markets and online gambling platforms growing in popularity, the Wisconsin
Elections Commission is warning voters: if you bet on an election - it could cost you your vote," reads a WEC press release.

No ambiguity there.

This new Constitutional qualification— no betting by Wisconsin residents on Wisconsin elections from anywhere— to vote is created by two statutes, (one in the criminal code; one a voter eligibility statute), says the Wisconsin Elections Commission.

WEC is reacting to the emergence of trading and prediction markets, Kalsi and Polymarket, that are legal under federal regulation as financial derivatives, and legal in many states.

This is the Gov Tony Evers (D) administration at work in Wisconsin where mostly Democrat, anti-gambling dogma is claimed to supplant the Wisconsin Constitution on Suffrage (voting).

At issue are two Wisconsin statutes, cited by WEC today:

Wisconsin Statute § 6.03(2) explicitly disqualifies electors from voting “in any election in which the person has made or become interested, directly or indirectly, in any bet or wager depending upon the result of the election.”
Wisconsin Statute § 12.13(1)(a) makes it a Class I felony to intentionally vote in an election without being qualified to do so.

Wisconsin statutes above as with any state law apply to acts committed within Wisconsin jurisdiction, within Wisconsin boundaries.

But not according to Wisconsin Elections Commission.

And not according to Ann Jacobs, former Wisconsin Election Chair and Democrat: "What you cannot do is bet there [in other states] and vote here."

The Wisconsin Elections Commission, remarkably, fails to address basic state law jurisdiction principles, and creation of new constitutional qualification to vote without amending the Constitution.

Jurisdiction

Since when does commitment of a legal act in one state, X, come within the adjudicative power of another state, Y?

I posed this question to WEC this morning:

[O]n the matter of jurisdiction, are not Wisconsin voters who are acting legally in other states by betting, beyond the reach of Wisconsin law, and contemplated criminal prosecution?

If I smoke pot in Chicago, have I acted beyond jurisdiction of Wisconsin law, and does smoking or betting in legal jurisdictions of sovereign states not carry any criminal taint into Wisconsin?

No reply.

I did get replies in social media from the former Wisconsin Elections Commission Chair, Ann Jacobs, speaking as a private citizen. Below are questions and answers:

What about betting in a different state such as Missouri, Ohio or Nevada where this betting is legal? Are you really claiming jurisdiction of Wisconsin law extends beyond Wisconsin into other states? Betting here, no. But betting beyond Wisconsin border, no problem, correct?

— Michael Leon (@mal644) July 21, 2026

What about betting in a different state such as Missouri, Ohio or Nevada where this betting is legal? Are you really claiming jurisdiction of Wisconsin law extends beyond Wisconsin into other states? Betting here, no. But betting beyond Wisconsin border, no problem, correct?

— Michael Leon (@mal644) July 21, 2026

According to Wisconsin Democrat orthodoxy, Wisconsin law now extends to acts committed outside its territorial borders.

And administrative fiat is now sufficient to create a new Constitutional qualification to vote without amending the Wisconsin Constitution.

Jacobs did not acknowledge basic jurisdictional principles, that is that betting in other states is activity beyond Wisconsin's territorial jurisdiction.  

But, Jacobs finally acknowledged that "the [Wisconsin] act it applies to is not the betting occurring in another state," pretending Jacobs said this all along, (she did not, and is lying).

Then, in the next sentence Jacobs contradicted herself, saying, "What you cannot do is bet there and vote here."

Better than what the WEC is willing to acknowledge at least.

This is Wisconsin Democrats today.

— Ann Jacobs (@AnnJacobsMKE) July 21, 2026

Bottom line if you want to gamble on Wisconsin elections, go ahead, just do it in another state beyond the jurisdiction of Wisconsin law.

Whatever WEC Administrator Meagan Wolfe says, you can bet heavily on elections outside Wisconsin and Democrat nannies cannot do a thing about it.

Below is WEC July 21 press release reproduced in full.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Wisconsin Elections Commissioners
Don M. Millis, chair | Marge Bostelmann | Ann S. Jacobs | Carrie Riepl | Robert Spindell | Mark L. Thomsen
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Administrator
Meagan Wolfe
Wisconsin Elections Commission
201 West Washington Avenue | Second Floor | P.O. Box 7984 | Madison, WI 53707-7984
(608) 266-8005 | elections@wi.gov | elections.wi.gov
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:
July 21, 2026 Emilee Miklas, emilee.miklas@wisconsin.gov
Don’t Bet on Your Ballot: WEC Warns Voters Against
Election Gambling
MADISON – With prediction markets and online gambling platforms growing in popularity, the Wisconsin
Elections Commission is warning voters: if you bet on an election - it could cost you your vote.
“We want voters to understand that they cannot legally make a bet on an election and cast a ballot in that
same election,” WEC Administrator Meagan Wolfe said. “We are not able to police someone placing a bet
on these platforms, but it’s important for voters to understand the consequences if they bet on an election
outcome.”
Wisconsin law is clear: a voter cannot, even indirectly, make a bet or wager on the outcome of an election
and then vote in that same election:
• Wisconsin Statute § 6.03(2) explicitly disqualifies electors from voting “in any election in which
the person has made or become interested, directly or indirectly, in any bet or wager depending upon
the result of the election.”
• Wisconsin Statute § 12.13(1)(a) makes it a Class I felony to intentionally vote in an election
without being qualified to do so.
Voters who place bets on elections and then try to vote in that election may be subject to voter qualification
administrative challenges, which, if successful, would prevent them from being able to cast their ballot and
could also result in a referral to the District Attorney.
Earlier this month, the bipartisan Commission unanimously voted and approved a memo during its July 9,
2026, meeting outlining legal ramifications and concerns about prediction markets and elections. You can
view the memo in the open session materials here (beginning on page 149).
Prediction markets, most prominently run by the companies Kalshi and Polymarket, have quickly emerged
and become popular across the United States. Users can trade and invest in “yes” or “no” outcomes, from
sporting events to what the President may do on a certain day.
Regulation of prediction markets has been a recent litigation topic at the state and federal levels.
There are currently no federal laws addressing prediction markets for elections, however the Stop Trading
On Predictions (STOP) Corrupt Bets Act of 2026 (H.R. 8123) which would ban prediction market bets on
elections has been introduced as a bill. The U.S. Senate also has banned its members and staff from
prediction market betting.
More than half of states (23) have laws that prohibit betting or wagering on elections, at least under certain
circumstances, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of data from the National Conference of State
Legislatures (NCSL).
Additionally, Governor Tony Evers signed Executive Order #294 to address the growing concern for
government officials’ use of prediction markets, which prohibits all Wisconsin state executive branch
employees from “disclosing or using any nonpublic information obtained due to their public service to
personally profit from, avoid loss from, or assist another person or entity, including spouses and family
members, in profiting or avoiding loss from participating in prediction markets.”
#

Wisconsin Dem Primary Race for Gov—Explosive Shite Show

Establishment effort to rig Primary race appears doomed, sure to divide Democratic Party 

Commentary

Madison, Wisconsin — Wisconsin Democrat establishment — off-center from grassroots voters — lost their rightest champ, Lt Gov Sara Rodriquez, who suspended her campaign for governor under a smokey ethical and legal cloud.

State Rep. Francesca Hong (D-Madison), a young progressive, appears on the glidepath to the Democrat Party nomination for Wisconsin governor.

So, outgoing Wisconsin Gov Tony Evers will stay out of the race, and leave it to voters three weeks out from Aug 11 Election Day. Right?

Wrong.

Democrats Party bureaucrats and Zionist donors moved hard today for Zionist Milwaukee County Exec David Crowley's reentry into the race, following Sara Rodriquez' exit.

Wisconsin Democrats—Peace v Genocide

Early Friday, Crowley said, yes, to getting back in, setting off a race described in historical terms by Wisconsin political journalist, Bill McCoshen: "This is going to turn into a battle for the soul of the WI Dem party over the next 24 days."

This is going to turn into a battle for the soul of the WI Dem party over the next 24 days.

— Bill McCoshen (@BillMcCoshen11) July 17, 2026

The description is apt and recalls the anti-war movement here of the 1960s when the Wisconsin Peace Movement took over the Wisconsin Democratic Party in 1968, as a grassroots coalition of peace activists and college students propelled Minnesota Sen Eugene McCarthy to a massive upset victory over incumbent President Lyndon Johnson in the April 2 Democratic presidential primary.

Wisconsin Democrats are at a crossroads not seen since 1968 
when the Peace Movement displaced pro-war old guard.

We are at a similar moment recalling the 1968 Democratic National Convention in Chicago and the demands for peace by Wisconsin's delegates led by Donald Peterson, the Wisconsin state chair.

Those events led to a powerful anti-intervention force in Wisconsin politics lasting some 50 years.

Today, at issue is Genocide that has taken on prominence when establishment Democrats, Sara Rodriquez and David Crowley, earlier this month snubbed a voter forum at the last moment in Oak Creek organized by the Wisconsin Muslim Civic Alliance, after learning questions would include, "Do you agree with the overwhelming consensus among genocide experts that the Israeli government’s actions in Gaza constitute a genocide?" 

Reports John Nichols:

Why did Rodriguez and Crowley skip the forum? The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported that they opted out 'after learning they would be asked about Israel's actions in Gaza and other controversial topics.' At issue were 'lightning round' questions that asked for yes/no responses to inquiries about, among other things, whether candidates thought the Israeli military assault on Gaza — which has cost the lives of more that 70,000 Palestinian men, women and children — was 'a genocide.'

Five candidates remain now: Frontrunner Francesca Hong, Mandela Barnes, Kelda Roys, Joel Brennan and David Crowley.

It's likely Evers and pro-Genocide Wisconsin Democrats will push to clear the field as much as possible following Crowley's reentry Saturday. 

But noone knows how successful this effort will be this late in the game as animosities linger, and Wisconsin's population remains heavily anti-Genocide.

Writes Matt Henkel: "Roughly 70,000 Wisconsinites have already voted in the August primary. Theres a whole day lag to that number. By the time Crowley gets into the race I’m betting it’ll be 100,000. The math to pull this top-down Dem insider driven switchweroo is not even close to in their favor."

In 2018, when Gov Evers won a plurality with 41 percent of the vote, the Wisconsin Democratic Party Gubernatorial Primary results saw 538,857 total votes cast.

This means roughly 18 percent of the vote has been already cast today, and David Crowley can be expected to have garnered only a scattering.

So, Crowley will not win, and Evers and Party bureaucrats will have alienated and incensed 10,000s of well-organized Francesca Hong voters who already are hostile towards the Democrat establishment.

What is the Wisconsin Democrat Party thinking? They are not thinking, they are following orders to appease an aggressive and indecent Zionist wing.

To find out from whom, run the Sara Rodriquez and David Crowley big donors through Tracking AIPAC and Open Secrets, though arriving at figures is difficult in state elections.

The Democrat-establishment's attempted rigging reeks of desperation, and most observers who have gamed the effort through are scoffing at it.

Wisconsin Democrat Establishment Fav, Lt Gov Sara Rodriquez, Snubs Muslims

Wisconsin Democrats reach absurdity not seen since fleeing 
from a foul, vicious white rabbit (at left) of Monty Python 
fame in 1975. White rabbit and other scary foes forced 
King Arthur and his Knights of the Round Table to run away.

Governor's Race Features Democrat Bigotry Against Muslims

Commentary

Madison, Wisconsin— Wisconsin's Democrat establishment left no doubt how they feel about American Muslims at the July Gubernatorial Candidate Forum in Oak Creek, hosted by the Wisconsin Muslim Civic Alliance.

Run away!

In my entire life in Wisconsin, I have not witnessed a more cowardly and vile act of bigotry from Wisconsin Democrats.

The vile is so bad, it's laughable.

This is a battle cry exclaimed with an absurd urgency rivaling Monty Python's King Arthur and his Knights of the Round Table shouted as they fled a vicious white rabbit and anybody else perceived to be scary.

Wisconsin gubernatorial candidates, Lieutenant Governor Sara Rodriquez led the retreat, with David Crowley, (Milwaukee County Executive), in tow, as both at the last moment rebuffed appearance in the Forum. 

Crowley, who never garnered more than low single digits in statewide polls, resigned a few days after the event, and declared he has decided it's time for other candidates to rally around Rodriquez now that Crowley's campaign was rejected by voters, (WisPolitics).

"All the candidates should be looking really hard as far as what do they want to see as an outcome," Crowley intoned, (WisPolitics).

Reported the Muslim Civic Alliance, (WMCA) on the forum and its fleeing guests: 

[Forum is] a chance for candidates to speak directly to a community of over 70,000 Wisconsin Muslims who have too often been an afterthought in state politics. While six candidates were scheduled to attend, two candidates cancelled shortly before the forum after receiving the list of 13 questions they would face. ...
Among our questions was a simple yes-or-no: Do you agree with the overwhelming consensus among genocide experts that the Israeli government’s actions in Gaza constitute a genocide?" ...
The questions asked were meant to measure the candidates’ moral clarity as they seek to lead this state: on the atrocities and genocide in Gaza and whether or not they selectively seek to restrict First Amendment rights through Wisconsin’s IHRA and anti-BDS [Boycott-Divest-Sanction Israel] laws.

Media Coverage Light

The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel's Molly Beck first reported on the Democrat snub of Wisconsin Muslims on July 9.

John Nichols followed with a first-rate piece on July 12 in the Madison daily, The Capital Times, defending Wisconsin's estimated 70,000 Muslims, and heavily criticizing Wisconsin Democrats. 

Writes Nichols:

So, it was quite reasonable to presume that all of the Democratic contenders for governor of Wisconsin would be enthusiastic about showing up for the July 1 candidate forum organized by the Wisconsin Muslim Civic Alliance and Wisconsin Muslim Civic Foundation. But it didn’t work out that way. ... 
A pair of Democratic contenders pulled out of last week’s forum after learning they would be asked about Israel's assault on Gaza and other controversial topics. Organizers of the forum complained, 'Two campaigns withdrew, rather than respond to our forum questions.' Those candidates were Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez and Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley. Crowley has since suspended his candidacy and endorsed Rodriguez, who remains very much in the running.
Why did Rodriguez and Crowley skip the forum? The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported that they opted out 'after learning they would be asked about Israel's actions in Gaza and other controversial topics.' At issue were 'lightning round' questions that asked for yes/no responses to inquiries about, among other things, whether candidates thought the Israeli military assault on Gaza — which has cost the lives of more that 70,000 Palestinian men, women and children — was 'a genocide.'

Genocide Is Forbidden Topic Among Wisconsin Democrats

Anti-Muslim sentiment is a defining feature of the Wisconsin Democrat establishment funded with heavy Zionist money and unhinged Zionist mouthpieces such as Ann Jacobs. 

Wisconsin Democrats parade their fear and hatred of Wisconsin's 70,000 Muslims, owing in part to this heavy Zionist blood money to the Democrats.

Still, in response, many Democrat politicos have gone silent, seeing who speaks up, though Democrat candidates being Democrat candidates still believe there is not a political price to be paid by their silence in this time of moral crisis with a madman in the White House funding israel with ungodly sums of money.

An educated guess who wins the Democratic Party nomination for Governor on August 11 sees State Rep Francesca Hong (D-Madison) running away with the Primary victory, or winning a close battle over Mandela Barnes, with Sara Rodriquez who has not moved the needle, to this bringing up the rear.

For campaign updates, see Bill McCoshen on X.
---
The Wisconsin Muslim Civic Alliance (WMCA) July 2, 2026 press release on the Wisconsin Democrat snub is republished below:

FRANKLIN, WI — On July 1, 2026, the Wisconsin Muslim Civic Alliance (WMCA) hosted a Gubernatorial Candidate Forum at the Oak Creek Performing Arts Center, a chance for candidates to speak directly to a community of over 70,000 Wisconsin Muslims who have too often been an afterthought in state politics.  While six candidates were scheduled to attend, two candidates cancelled shortly before the forum after receiving the list of 13 questions they would face.

In the spirit of transparency and fairness, we shared the discussion topics earlier in the week and, on the day of the forum, provided every participating candidate with the complete list of questions. This ensured each candidate had an equal opportunity to prepare thoughtful, substantive responses. The forum featured six in-depth questions and seven lightning-round questions (yes or no), covering issues ranging from IHRA and Gaza and independent redistricting. Despite this level of transparency, two candidates chose to withdraw. We were deeply disappointed that Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley withdrew just hours before the forum, while Lt. Governor Sara Rodriguez withdrew after the forum had already begun.

Among our questions was a simple yes-or-no: Do you agree with the overwhelming consensus among genocide experts that the Israeli government’s actions in Gaza constitute a genocide?  

This question came directly from the Wisconsin Muslim community. The results of many listening sessions with our community are unambiguous: Wisconsin Muslims are not a monolith on most issues; we hold a wide range of views on economic policy, education, criminal justice, and more. But on this issue, our community speaks with a single voice. What is happening in Gaza is a genocide, and our community expects its elected leaders to say so plainly.  WMCA exists to serve as the vehicle to ensure our community gets answers and accountability on core issues. The questions asked were meant to measure the candidates’ moral clarity as they seek to lead this state: on the atrocities and genocide in Gaza and whether or not they selectively seek to restrict First Amendment rights through Wisconsin’s IHRA and anti-BDS laws.

Two campaigns withdrew, rather than respond to our forum questions. On the lightning-round issues, our community has not asked for round-about responses, but clear positions.  However, we generously offered two minutes at the end of the lightning round questions for candidates to make any clarifications.

Some campaigns have since offered private meetings in place of the public forum. Private meetings are not a substitute for public forums. Our community deserves the dignity and respect of having the questions that matter to us answered to gain our votes, in public and on the record. We cannot always have a curated version delivered behind closed doors to a select audience. Nonetheless, WMCA is still open to engage in dialogue with the two candidates who did not attend and hear their perspective as we continue to advocate on behalf of the community.  

Time and time again, we have witnessed attempts to silence the Muslim community. Silencing our community or evading discourse about issues like the genocide has serious impacts and is the backbone of the Trump Administration’s fight to suppress, detain, and deport our community members, building precedents for broad-based suppression. This is relevant for the state as a major Wisconsin leader, Salah Sarsour, is still fighting deportation proceedings as retaliation for his free speech against the atrocities in Palestine. 

Wisconsin Muslims have been an integral part of the state for generations and have demonstrated themselves as a powerful voting bloc. We are organized, engaged, and deeply connected to allied communities. We are proud members of coalitions that span racial, ethnic, and faith communities across the state.  Several questions came directly from coalitions that WMCA are part of, from independent redistricting, to 287(g) agreements and even data center accountability.  

The Wisconsin Muslim community will always ask direct questions because that is who we are and have always been. We will always stand up for justice because that is what our faith demands of us. 
#

McCarthyism Comes Back to Wisconsin, Dem Primary Race for Governor Goes Rancid

Wisconsin Sen. Joe McCarthy (R) led a national descent 
into madness as the infamous 'Red Scare' champ lied and
 defamed his way into the leading anti-communist, ruining 
lives and families along the way. McCarthy-lite is the 
order now-a-days, as anti-Semitism charges are thrown
about like fireworks and confetti by inheritors of this 
putrid man who stood for nihilism and lies as values.

Democrat-launched Slurs Do 'Gunner Joe' Proud, to Wisconsin's Shame

Commentary

Madison, Wisconsin—Wisconsin's political class has been clamoring for a split among Wisconsinites in the race for the Democratic Party nomination for governor.  

They got their wish.

 Zionist liberals in the Wisconsin media and allied candidates share a desperation to keep Wisconsin State Rep. Francesca Hong from running away with the Democratic Primary.

War, genocide and a shaky economy see an emergence of pro-working class, anti-war candidates across the nation whom corporatist liberals are working to stop.

Corporate and establishment Democrats falsely accuse candidates such as Francesca Hong of virtually everything, as Party establishments continues to alienate the working class, right as progressive strategists point to new data showing workers overwhelmingly support progressive economic policies—including raising the minimum wage, expanding Medicare, and higher taxes on corporations.

Faux Scandal

Now, corporatists have discovered what they believe is a campaign sandal involving Francesca Hong: Nothing Hong has said or done, rather Hong's public appearance with a social media streamer/content creator named Hasan Piker on social media sites, Twitch, and Youtube, is is the asserted scandal.

Nothing Hong has said or done on Piker's show either. Just hostility towards the mere fact of Hong's appearance with Hasan Piker is presented as scandalous, because bad-faith effort to silence legitimate anti-Zionist dissent and progressive policy advocacy for working class Americans.

The issue is Piker is a critic of Genocide, torture, slaughter of children and rape by israel in the occupied territories, among Piker's other moral condemnation of atrocities, such as war; bombing girls' schools, so on, therefor Francesca Hong must be held to account for each and every statement, formulation of statement and others' intentional misrepresentations of statements Hasan Piker has ever made on social media, including all slurs and lies that 'critics' have hurled towards Piker for appearing on a live-stream show with a Piker.

Piker has also mads statements echoing U.S. intelligence on the danger of blow-back when various geniuses in the White House decide to start a war or three.

Who is running for Wisconsin governor: Piker or Hong? 

It's the way it is now. Hong even appeared on another social media show in late June. 

The Wisconsin State Journal republished the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel's absurd hit piece on Hong, (authored by Hope Karnopp and Molly Beck) though most of the piece is about Piker who is defamed, and then falsely presented as having relevancy to Wisconsin's gubernatorial campaign, in a display of third-rate McCarthyism by Wisconsin's two largest dailies. 

Hong's social media appearance is presented by Journal-Sentinel's Karnopp and Beck as somehow defining Hong, and uses the polemical device, 'critics call,' 'critics have called,' (references to Piker), as a method to portray this dishonest hit piece on Piker and Hong as objective reporting.

Hope Karnopp, Molly Beck and most corporate 'journalists,' including Wisconsin State Journal editors, are just shoveling slop, lies and misrepresentations. 

And Karnopp and Beck know fully well what they're doing.

Karnopp's colleague, Molly Beck, at the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel ran an even more absurd piece on the governor's race in the Spring featuring a Trump flunky, Tom Tiffany claiming Francesca Hong is a Satanist who wore a hat bearing the mark of the devil—three sixes. Sincerely.

Molly Beck ran the absurdity as a he-said, she-said piece, not bothering to report the lack of evidence of satanism, the falsity of what Republicans said, the utter ridiculousness of the charge, or the fact that the Republican attack is not true. 

This is what passes for modern journalism. 

If you subscribe to Wisconsin State Journal and Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, dump the trash.

Hong campaign opponents, David Crowley and Kelda Roys, facing little pathway to the nomination on Aug 11, issued critical statements that this writer will not bother posting here because of the pure inanity of the comment; see Heartland Post.

Ann Jacobs, Political Mania

Meanwhile, the unhinged Ann Jacobs, former Wisconsin Elections Commission (WEC) Commissioner, and a supporter of David Crowley, blasted Francesca Hong in a fit of Hypomania and falsehoods, calling for banning of speech and speakers such as Piker whom Jacobs views as hateful for opposing Genocide. 

Reports Urban Milwaukee on Jacobs' incoherent and defamatory rant:

[Jacobs] tweeted that Hong was "willing to sell out the Jews of Wisconsin for a few bucks."

"Why are those people you want to be in conversation with? Is it just for the money? You’re willing to sell out the Jews of Wisconsin so that you can raise money? That’s disturbing," said Jacobs, who also co-chairs the Jewish Caucus of the Wisconsin Democratic Party, in an interview with Wisconsin Public Radio.

"I don’t think we should tolerate all forms of opinions," Jacobs added. "I don’t think that we should tolerate antisemitism, Islamophobia, and all these other hate groups that are rampant right now on social media."

Jacobs reposted on X, posts by David Crowley and Molly Beck.

In the political atmosphere today, anyone objecting to israel-committed Genocide, slaughter of children and rape are asserted to be per force anti-Semites.

Absurd, but the McCarthyite defamation helps the Democrat Party to smash candidates who stand with working class families, always a frightening prospect for the Democratic Party establishment.

History repeats.
 
McCarthyism

In the 1940-50s, Truman, Democrats and Joe McCarthy ushered in an era of suppression, working to squash labor-led effort to help out working class folk, as McCarthyism ruined lives to counter the "energizing effect of the war and the depression in mobilizing the population, and causing them to challenge the- to reveal the mysteries of government, and do all these bad things," noted Noam Chomsky, (Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media. Delivered at University of Wisconsin – Madison, March 15, 1989). ... "Wars, depressions, and such things, they have a way of arousing people from apathy, and making them think, and sometimes even organize."

Progressives and working-class advocates thinking, organizing and running for office have caused Democrats to veer into political hysterics.

As Trump, delving into lunacy extreme even for him. declares prominent politicians opposing him as a 'communist' and 'anti-Semitic' and 'terrorist,' those who either have lived through McCarthyism or are students of the political mania, see history repeated in many Democrats and media propaganda led by the Wisconsin State Journal and the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel.

 

McCarthyism is alive and well in Wisconsin, though the conventional slur today is anti-Semite, not communist, unless you're the president.
---
Top candidates for the 2026 Democratic Party nominee for Wisconsin governor include: Mandela Barnes (the top Zionist), Francesca Hong, Sara Rodriguez, David Crowley, and Kelda Roys.

Election Day is August 11.
#

Francesca Hong Could Change Socialism in Wisconsin and America
See video below:

Wisconsin Early Voting Gets Surprise Boost from Ballot Mail-in Case, Watson v RNC

Molly McGrath (left), a voting rights attorney with the ACLU, 
works with Madison residents to get IDs they need to vote under 
Wisconsin’s strict voter-ID law. Early voting efforts by election 
clerks in metro voting districts increased voter turnout following
a pro-voting rights win in federal district court in One Wisconsin 
Institute v. Thomsen (2016) that swept away Wisconsin Republican 
voter-obstruction legislation. Today, early voting received another 
boost from the U.S. Supreme Court in the election law case that 
rejected Republicans' legal theory that federal law requires 
states to reject absentee ballots received after election day. Early 
voting was not at issue in Watson v Republican National Committee,
and came up in oral arguments in March 13, 2016.
(Photo courtesy of Molly McGrath) 

Republican Legal Theory Limiting Voting Is Rejected by U.S. Supreme Court

MADISON, WIS. — A  major front in Trump's war against voting was dealt a 5-4 defeat Monday in the closely watched election law case, Watson v. Republican National Committee.

The U.S. Supreme Court majority opinion is authored by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, and brought together Chief Justice John Roberts and the Court's three liberal justices.

Trump, the U.S. DoJ and national and state Republicans had decided states should only count mail-in ballots received on or before Election Day, federal law requires states to reject absentee ballots received after election day. Both propositions were rejected.

Republicans challenged a Mississippi statute that allows ballots postmarked by Election Day.

Mississippi is one of roughly 30 States that count some absentee ballots mailed by election day but received afterward, Barrett noted.

Republican Legal Theory Rejected

The Republican position is soundly rejected in Watson v. Republican National Committee, in which Justice Barrett concludes, "The question today is not whether requiring ballots to be received by election day is a good or bad idea; the question is whether the idea has made its way into the United States Code."

Early Voting Gets Explicitly Affirmed

Early voting efforts, especially in Wisconsin that has substantially utilized early voting efforts by election clerks in metro voting districts the last eight years, were given an unexpected affirmation by Watson v. Republican National Committee, after years of state partisan battle with Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, (2011-19).

The issue of early voting is not of issue in Watson, but arose in oral arguments and in briefing, in which litigants and the Court argued whether federal election-day statutes prevent states from counting mail-in ballots that are postmarked by Election Day, but arrive up to five days later, as in Mississippi.

In oral arguments justices frequently push lawyers to apply their legal theories to hypothetical situations. Both the Republican National Committee and U.S. Department of Justice attorneys agreed in oral arguments federal election-day statutes permit early voting, Barrett pointed out.

Paul D. Clement, Alexandria, Va.; and D. John Sauer, Solicitor General, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae) argued the RNC's case at oral arguments as respondents.

Early Voting in Wisconsin

In federal district court in One Wisconsin Institute v. Thomsen (2016) a landmark voting rights win swept away much Wisconsin Republican voter-obstruction legislation, 2013 Wisconsin Act 146, that included curtailing in-person absentee voting, early voting, aimed at minorities in Madison and Milwaukee.

In One Wisconsin Institute v. Thomsen, (2016), U.S. District Judge James Peterson writes:

Plaintiffs (voting rights advocates) have adduced evidence that weekend and evening voting is particularly important for socioeconomically disadvantaged voters, and that, in Wisconsin and nationwide, African American and Latino voters have made particularly good use of various forms of early voting. 
Early voting in groups on Sundays—including church-supported “Souls to the Polls” efforts—is a widespread practice among African American voters, in Wisconsin and nationwide.
But again, a disparate impact, without more, does not prove intentional discrimination.
But plaintiffs have more. Statements by legislators show that Act 146 reduced the hours allowed for in-person absentee voting specifically to curtail voting in Milwaukee, and, secondarily, in Madison. [State] Senator Grothman made repeated statements objecting to the extended hours for in-person absentee voting in Milwaukee and Madison, indicating that hours for voting needed to be “reined in.” On the floor of the senate, he said, “I want to nip this in the bud before too many other cities get on board.” 
Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald made similar comments. As he put it, “But the question of where this is coming from and why are we doing this and why are we trying to disenfranchise people, I mean, I say it's because the people I represent in the 13th district continue to ask me, ‘What is going on in Milwaukee?’ ...
The legislature's ultimate objective was political: Republicans sought to maintain control of the state government. But the methods that the legislature chose to achieve that result involved suppressing the votes of Milwaukee's residents, who are disproportionately African American and Latino. The legislature did not act out of pure racial animus; rather, suppressing the votes of reliably Democratic minority voters in Milwaukee was a means to achieve its political objective. But that, too, constitutes race discrimination.

Many Wisconsin cities did get on board promoting early voting in response to the District Court's 2016 evisceration of 2013 Wisconsin Act 146.

Now, the U.S. Supreme Court has given One Wisconsin Institute v. Thomsen precedent protection in a case that will control expected Republican legal and state counter offensives.

Notes Jacob Knutson on early voting in Watson v. Republican National Committee in Democracy Docket:

In the case, [Watson] the RNC argued that Mississippi’s law offering a grace period for late-arriving ballots mailed by Election Day violated the election-day statutes: a set of federal laws that designate 'the Tuesday next after the first Monday in November… as the day for the election' for federal elections. ...

[T]he Court disagreed, ruling that the states 'do not set a deadline for ballot receipt' and therefore 'do not prevent Mississippi from counting ballots postmarked after election day yet received afterward.'

Barrett added that if the Court adopted the RNC’s legal theory in the case, 'early voting would also be at risk.'

'At bottom, plaintiffs’ theory is that because we are governed by 19th-century election-day laws, we are also governed by 19th-century voting practices,' she wrote. 

Going further, Barrett warned that, 'Carried to its logical conclusion, this theory would call into question the way modern elections work.'

Barrett noted in the opinion that the RNC and Department of Justice (DOJ) —  which joined the RNC in challenging Mississippi’s law — both agreed in oral arguments earlier this year that the election-day statutes permit early voting.

'Although the election-day statutes refer to a particular ‘day’ for the election, plaintiffs do not contend that everything must occur on that day,' Barrett wrote. 'For instance, they do not object to early voting or dispute that officials may count votes and certify a winner after election day."

Though he dissented from the Court’s decision on late-arriving mail ballots, Justice Samuel Alito agreed with the majority that the election-day statutes permit early voting.          

Thus, we see a Supreme Court voting rights case deciding the issue presented—affirming states can allow one class of voters to be counted, those whose absentee ballots arrive after Election Day while being postmarked by Election Day—and explicitly protecting a different class of absentee voters, early voters, after discussion in oral arguments.

There will a reckoning from Republicans in Wisconsin, and across the nation.

Republicans Eye Social Security Phase-out, Seek to Gut Earned Income Program

Republicans' Warrant to Destroy Security Security, SSA Trustees Are Trump Loyalists

Commentary

Scariest fourteen words in politics are: I'm from the Republican Party and I'm here to save Social Security and Medicare.

Republicans have for decades expressed desire to phase out Medicare and Social Security, and call it, entitlement reform, (Krugman, New York Times) (Krugman, New York Times).

Now, Republicans are squealing, again as they have for many years, they want to save Social Security. They call it reform again.

Writes Paul Krugman in June:

Whatever you may have heard, Social Security isn’t in danger of going bankrupt.

What we’re facing, instead, is potential political crisis. Congress and the White House could easily take action to sustain America’s retirement system. But given the current state of our politics, there’s no guarantee that they will. ... 

So don’t believe Republicans’ gaslighting that it will be necessary to cut Social Security benefits. All that is necessary to preserve Social Security is political will to raise taxes on the wealthy and a sensible immigration policy.

Today, "Speaker Mike Johnson’s (R-La.) call for Republicans to act on Social Security reform if they keep control of Congress in 2027 is getting pushback from Senate Republicans who warn it’s a bad political message heading into November."

"Yet, a trustees’ report that the popular retirement program will become insolvent sooner than expected has lit a fire under lawmakers in both parties to call for reforms such as raising the cap on payroll taxes, 'means testing' beneficiaries, raising the retirement age, and creating personal accounts to invest in the stock markets," reports Alexander Bolton.

First, the Social Security trustees are all Trump loyalists, extremists who will follow any and all of Trump's dictates.  

Trump and Republican-led Congress are intentionally trying to bleed and starve the Social Security Trust Funds, and then tell you they have no choice but to gut the most popular earned-income, social program in history.

It's like choking and starving someone to use a sick metaphor, and then declaring this person is unsustainable, insolvent and cannot live, so sorry.

From the Social Security Administration:

The Board of Trustees is comprised of four members who serve by virtue of their positions with the federal government: Scott Bessent, Secretary of the Treasury and Managing Trustee; Frank J. Bisignano, Commissioner of Social Security; Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Secretary of Health and Human Services; and Keith E. Sonderling, Acting Secretary of Labor. The two public trustee positions are currently vacant.

Means testing means the government will investigate all of your assets and determine whether you get benefits from Social Security system that you paid into all of your life. 

Implementing means testing would usher in a radical, new attack on the Social Security system.

Republicans also advocate raising the retirement age before you can accept Social Security benefits.

Corporate media remains a hostile force against Social Security.

By law, Social Security has its own dedicated revenue streams (payroll taxes) and legally distinct trust funds from the U.S. Treasury. 

Any politician, such as Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson (R) who says we need to cut Social Security benefits, which has funded the rest of government spending for decades, is lying.

"The argument being used to cut Social Security is that because we have a significant deficit problem and a $14 trillion national debt, [in 2011] we just can’t afford to maintain Social Security benefits. This argument is false. Social Security, because it is funded by the payroll tax, not the U.S. Treasury, has not contributed one nickel to our deficit," warned Bernie Sanders back in 2011. "In fact, according to a very recent study by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) Social Security has a $2.5 trillion dollar surplus and can pay out every penny owed to every eligible American for the next 27 years until 2038." 

As Paul Krugman noted in 2015, "[N]o, Social Security does not face a financial crisis; its long-term funding shortfall could easily be closed with modest increases in revenue." (New York Times)

But our money is looked upon as potential windfalls by predatory Wall Street, and the media corporations who do Wall Street's bidding, want our money, your money.

Republicans surveilling your money should frighten the hell out of you. 

I have no idea if Democrats are up to the challenge of stopping the Republicans.

Wisconsin Gov Primary—Mandela Barnes Took $250,000-plus from Israel Lobby in 2022

Mandela Barnes accepted $251,415 from the Israel Lobby
as the 2022 Democratic Party nominee for U.S. Senate.
Barnes is a candidate for the 2026 Democratic Party
nomination for governor. Election Day is Aug 11.
Barnes' 2022 campaign gifts are tracked by Open Secrets.

Israel Lobby Gifted Barnes Campaign in 2022 Senate Run, Will Doom Electability as Pro-Genocide Blood Money Shows Character Problem

Commentary

Madison, Wisconsin—The campaign for the Democratic nominee for Wisconsin governor is off and running.

Mandela Barnes, whose supporters are dropping dishonest 'electabililty-concern' social media posts about Barnes' opponents, has taken to dead silence when asked about his accepting $251,415 from the Israel Lobby as 2022 Democratic Party nominee for U.S. Senate, (see Open Secrets).

During the 2022 U.S. Senate election in Wisconsin, Mandela Barnes was gifted substantial pro-Israel money from Zionist donors and conduits.

Barnes explicitly declared in 2022, "It's important that Israel remains a strong ally and a strong partner in the Middle East," in June 2022, just before absentee voting began, as reported in Jewish Insider as Barnes sought to highlight his pro-Zionist commitment.

Barnes told the Jewish Democratic Council of America forum in June 2022 that he opposes the global Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement (BDS) that seeks to highlight and stop Israeli human rights atrocities, (Washington Free Beacon).

The Mandela Barnes campaign is a top U.S. Senate candidate recipient of pro-Israel money during the 2022 federal elections.

Barnes has paid lip service to Wisconsin's peace movement, but has run from associations with anti-Genocide groups, (Washington Free Beacon).

But Israel-committed Genocide, Israel-sanctioned rape, torture and massacres of children play less well among the Democrat-voting electorate in 2026, and appears to be determinative in Michigan primaries to be held in early August, signaling a similar campaign dynamic in Wisconsin.

Top candidates for the 2026 Democratic Party nominee for Wisconsin governor include: Mandela Barnes, Francesca Hong, Sara Rodriguez, David Crowley, Kelda Roys and Missy Hughes. See analyses at Bill McCoshen in Dairyland Sentinel.

Barnes campaign was contacted by email asking: 

What is your comment on accepting $251,415 from the Israel Lobby as 2022 Democratic Party nominee for U.S. Senate?

Do you renounce this blood money?

As of Saturday, no comment from Barnes has been received.

Absentee voting for the Wisconsin Aug 11 elections begins June 26.

Memorial Day Weekend—2026

Happy Memorial Day Weekend

Fitchburg, Wisconsin—Memorial Day weekend begins today and we honor the fallen, the families, and make sense of sacrifice by keeping faith with revolutionary spirit.

This Summer we mark our 250th anniversary as a country and a promise of eternal hostility toward oppression.

We betray the fallen if we fail to speak out against the demonic beasts among us.

Our country is betraying the service of all by becoming a vassal state of Israel.

Our government has become Israel-first, fighting wars and draining our common treasure for the focus of evil in the world.

Today, right here, now, we must resist the enemies and traitors is our midst.

Israel must die, so humanity can live.

Democrats Need to Learn How to Speak about Liberty

Commentary

Fitchburg, Wisconsin—Wrote a piece eight years ago on voting rights work by city of Madison, Wisconsin, (In These Times).

Imagine a municipality affirmatively advancing the personal liberty of voting, a fundamental Constitutional right. That's what Madison, and other Wisconsin municipalities did.

But I had trouble getting a decent quote from Madison, and had to settle for Madison City Clerk Maribeth Witzel-Behl's statement. "Our goal is for each eligible voter to be able to cast a ballot and have that ballot counted."

Witzel-Behl's statement is bureaucratic, almost defensive, and neither mentions or shows explicit reverence to people's personal liberty to vote. Typical Democrat. No values, no understanding of what voting means as a liberty.

Liberty is ours, and Democrats don't get that.

That's because Witzel-Behl and virtually every Wisconsin Democrat in office do not believe in our foundational liberty of voting in Wisconsin, under Article III, Suffrage, Wisconsin Constitution. Democrats are little more than victims from multi-front attacks on cherished liberties. 

And federally, with a few exceptions, national Democrats are not much better. See Democracy Docket for an example of how to talk about and litigate liberty.

If Democrats want to establish a political culture defending and advocating for Constitutionally guaranteed liberties such as voting rights, they have failed—a dangerous defect when judicial supremacy reigns under a Republican judicial assault against liberty led by Republican partisans on the U.S. Supreme Court.

Civil Rights Movement

Memphis, Tennessee, USA, Civil Rights Marchers with 
"I Am A Man" Signs, 1968—Image Bettmann/CORBIS
Zinn Education Project

The 1950s-60s-70s succeeded culturally, legislatively and in federal court because grassroots Americans and citizen groups presented clear, moral and constitutionally grounded arguments for liberty, equality and the promise of America.

No DEI, no politically correct, scolding semantics, no identity-politics polemics that today seeks to foist and instruct a flight from reason onto the grassroots whose duty is perceived as mindless compliance.

Voting is your liberty, voting is your right. Anybody tries to stop you has to answer to us. That' needs to be the political message. This commitment and political statement is something we rarely get from Democrats.

The current assault on voting ofcourse is a long project of Republicans.

Wisconsin 2008 Voter Obstruction Effort

Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen and the Republican Party leveled their guns to obstruct voting rights on Wisconsin in 2008, lest too many of the wrong type of voters showed up for Obama.

Trump is attempting to replicate what Van Hollen wanted.

See Van Hollen's and the GOP 2008 efforts at voter suppression in which Van Hollen's ridiculous effort was tossed out of court.

In the 2008 case, (J B Van Hollen vs. Government Accountability Board (GAB) et al) Van Hollen tried to create a new Wisconsin constitutional qualification to vote by fiat: A perfect match of spelling of voters' names in state bureaucracies, after first secretly assuring fellow Republicans he would commence this frivolous legal action at the 2008 Republican National Convention held in Minneapolis, as first reported by WisPolitics in a scoop that includes audio.

Several former judges serving on the state Elections Board would have failed Van Hollen's new constitutional standard proposed in 2008, as this GOP effort drew wide ridicule and defeat in court.

"Nothing in state or federal law requires that there be a data match as a prerequisite for a citizen's right to vote," Judge Maryann Sumi said in dismissing Van Hollen's lawsuit that tried to use the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) as a voter suppression tool.

Today, Trump is attempting his similar anti-voting project by trying to nationalize state-administered elections. Trump is trying to create federal bureaucratic lists of state voters, and appointing his administration as the sole deciders who determine who gets to vote, based on bureaucratic and documentary exact matches of voters' names with mandated new documentation.

Elected Democrats need to comprehend and explain what Trump and Republicans are up to: Creation of anti-voting federal bureaucracies, unconstitutional bureaucracies, and simply speak out in clear terms: Don't fuck with voters.

I have my doubts Democrats' are equipped to stand with voters.

Wisconsin Gov. Evers' Political Grift on Commutations Aped by Media

Commentary

"I hate injustice. I guess that's about the only thing I really do hate."
Ben Shahn, anti-fascist artist, (1898–1969). 

Madison, Wisconsin — It's Easter 2026 and Gov. Tony Evers (D-Wisconsin) days earlier emitted typically deceitful posturing on executive clemency under the Wisconsin Constitution—pardons, (grants of forgiveness restoring civil rights); sentence commutations (roughly, shortening a sentence), and reprieves.

Last week, Evers penned two new April 2026 executive orders pertaining to Wisconsin commutations: Gov. Evers Executive Order #287: Relating to the Creation of the Governor's Commutation Advisory Board; April 3, 2026;   Gov. Evers Executive Order #288: Relating to the Creation of a Juvenile Life Sentence Commutation Process — April 3, 2026, some nine months after Evers' second term expires.

Evers' executive orders are misleading, as what passes for Wisconsin press misreports the legal power of executive orders and advisory boards (no legal power) vis a vis executive clemency in Wisconsin. 

This matters because wrongfully convicted in Wisconsin's corrupt criminal justice system—from Steven Avery, Penny Brummer to Brendan Dassey—are studiously avoided and deflected away by Tony Evers who infamously (at least among some circles) denied Dassey's 2019 pardon petition, falsely claiming an advisory board prohibited Evers from granting a pardon or commutation.

Commutations are only now available and restored after 25 years of not being available, falsely reports Evers' personal scribe, Frank Zefall in the Wisconsin Examiner, See, "Gov. Evers announces commutations will be available in Wisconsin."

My god, what is wrong with Zefall? Do he not research his topic?

Commutations have never in Wisconsin history been unavailable, there is no need to restore commutations as executive clemency which includes commutations remains an unchanged and exclusive Constitutional power of the Wisconsin governor. 

See, for example, Donald Leo Bach's work in the Wisconsin Lawyer, or better yet, read Article V, Section 6 of the Wisconsin Constitution.

Facts and Analysis on Commutation

Evers' predecessor, Gov. Scott Walker, refused to use his power of executive clemency and granted zero criminal sentence commutations, zero pardons and reprieves, in accordance with Walker's political commitments and wishes.

Gov. Tony Evers uses his power of executive clemency, but has granted zero sentence commutations, in accordance with Evers' political commitments protecting a corrupt criminal justice system, and blocking out even comment on wrongful convictions, much less commutations and pardons. 

Wisconsin Democrats do love their corrupt criminal justice system.

Advisory boards do not change Wisconsin governors' Constitutional power, but as in Evers' administration, advisory boards can serve as shields to protect political acts of cowardice and dishonesty on the part of the governor.

Evers has pardoned only those who have served full sentences-plus five years.

On commutations, Evers is aligned with Scott Walker, as both Walker and Evers granted zero commutations. 

Zero commutations differentiates Evers and Walker from Govs. Dreyfus, Earl and Thompson who together commuted 46 sentences between 1979-2001. 

I will never fathom the mania behind Wisconsin Democrats like Evers to posture and mislead.

Why did Evers set up his pardon regime in which applicants must wait years after serving a sentence, while simultaneously also refusing commutations?

Evers is offering political protection to the criminal justice system and law enforcement as he accepts as fact the system's findings, convictions and criminal sentencing. Evers effectively covers up for criminal justice system misconduct.

This, even as he attempts to accrue the political benefits of compassion that attend to an altogether weak and passive pardon and commutation regime that again has no force in law.

Not once has Evers called into question dishonest cops, crooked prosecutors, or intellectually dishonest judges.

Evers could stand up against small-town injustice, police corruption and the likes of Ken Kratz, the disgraced and manifestly unreliable prosecutor of wrongfully convicted Brendan Dassey and Steven Avery, of Making a Murderer, (Netflix, Inc), as well as myriad other cases of injustice.

Tony Evers owes no more fealty to the Wisconsin Judiciary and the criminal justice system than he does to the findings and integrity of the state legislature. 

Again, commutation and pardon advisory boards and guidelines have no more force in law than if Evers consulted Tarot cards or astrology. It's just cover. 

And it takes an obvious misstatement of fact about the governors' unchallenged executive clemency power to cover up Evers' cowardice.

Evers is offering political protection to the criminal justice system as he implicitly accepts as fact the system's findings, convictions and criminal sentencing choosing finality over truth. 

As a member of Brendan Dassey's post-conviction defense team, former U.S. Solicitor General, Seth Waxman, said in Oct 2019 in Madison, "I have never had a case that has troubled me more than this case, that has kept me awake at night, that makes me anxious and sad. And that's because I know that Brendan Dassey is innocent."

Tony Evers does not care, and he lies and misleads to hide this fact.