2014 Post-Election Analysis: Wisconsin

Home , Brad Schimel, Howard Marklein, Mary Burke, Reid Ribble, Roger Roth

2014 POST-ELECTION ANALYSIS: WISCONSIN

TABLE OF CONTENTS

STATE OVERVIEW 2

Registration Overview 3

Turnout Analysis 3

Absentee/Early Voting 4

Regional Analysis 5

Election-Law Impacts 5

Exit Polling 6

GOVERNOR 11

Media Spending Analysis 14

Geographic Analysis 17

ATTORNEY GENERAL 19

Media Spending Analysis 21

Geographic Analysis 23

STATE LEGISLATURE 25

State Senate 25

State Assembly 26

Consequences 27

STATE OVERVIEW

Wisconsin is a polarized state that leans Democratic in presidential cycles but has become increasingly competitive for Republicans in midterm elections.1 While President Obama won the state by just under 7% in 2012, Governor Scott Walker won his recall election earlier that year by an almost identical margin.2 2010 was also a blockbuster year for Republicans. In addition to Walker’s election, Republicans beat an incumbent Democratic U.S. Senator and flipped control of both chambers of the state legislature.3

Since the GOP takeover of state government in 2010, Governor Walker has pushed through several controversial pieces of legislation, including Act 10, a so-called “budget repair bill” that severely curtailed collective bargaining rights for public employees in the state and sparked widespread protests.4 He also supported a controversial voter ID law that has been the subject of extensive legal action.5 In response to Walker’s aggressive right-wing agenda, unions led the effort to recall him, but he beat back a strong challenge from Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett.

This year, Walker faced a fierce challenge from Mary Burke, a Madison school board member and the former state Commerce Secretary. In the 2010 election, Walker promised to create 250,000 new jobs, but Wisconsin’s economy is still struggling, and the state’s job growth has been especially lackluster.6 Burke kept her attacks on Walker focused on Wisconsin’s poor economic performance rather than revisiting the battle over Act 10.7

Walker’s controversial tenure has also affected the state’s contested race to replace outgoing Republican Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen. Since Walker was elected in 2010, the office has largely been tasked with defending several controversial laws that the governor championed, and Van Hollen became an extremely partisan Walker ally.8 Van Hollen, however, announced his retirement, which set up a contentious open race between Republican Brad Schimel and Democrat Susan Happ, both district attorneys of neighboring counties in the Milwaukee metropolitan area.9 Further down-ballot, there were some targeted state Senate elections as Democrats tried to recapture control of the chamber. Several members in competitive districts retired this year, setting up a number of pickup opportunities for both Democrats and Republicans.

On November 4th, Scott Walker beat Burke in his third victory in four years with 52.3% of the vote to her 46.6%. His six-point win was almost identical to his margins against Tom Barrett in his respective 2010 and 2012 elections. Democrats also fell short in the contested attorney general’s race, where Happ lost by a similar margin.10 Finally, Republicans maintained control of the state Senate and actually gained a seat as they enter into next year with firm control of state government.11

1 Craig Gilbert, “Explaining Wisconsin's dizzying political swings of 2010, 2012,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, November 10, 2012. 2 Atlas Online Toolkit, Election Results module, accessed 10/1/14. 3 Jason Stein, “Republicans take over state Senate, Assembly,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, November 3, 2010. 4 Steven Greenhouse, “Wisconsin’s Legacy for Unions,” New York Times, February 22, 2014. 5 Erika Eichelberger, “The Supreme Court Just Blocked Scott Walker's Voter ID Law,” Mother Jones, October 10, 2014. 6 Philip Bump, “Scott Walker’s 2010 jobs pledge was probably not a good idea,” Washington Post, September 5, 2014. 7 David Lauter, “In Wisconsin, Democrats try moderation in fight with Scott Walker,” Los Angeles Times, October 10, 2014. 8 Gilman Halstead, “J.B. Van Hollen Won't Seek Another Term As Attorney General,” Wisconsin Public Radio, October 7, 2013. 9 Patrick Marley, “Majority of voters know little about Brad Schimel, Susan Happ,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, October 25, 2014. 10 “Wisconsin: AP Election Results,” Associated Press, accessed November 5, 2014, at 12:31 p.m. 11 “GOP keeps Senate majority; La Follette, Adamczyk win,” Associated Press, November 5, 2014.

Wisconsin 2014 Election Results Dem vs. Incumbent Dem GOP Other Office Democrat Republican GOP % Party % % % Margin Governor Mary Burke Scott Walker R 46.6% 52.3% 1.1% -5.7% Secretary of State Doug La Follette Julian Bradley D 50.0% 46.3% 3.6% 3.7% Attorney General Susan Happ Brad Schimel OPEN (R) 45.4% 51.6% 3.0% -6.2% Treasurer David Sartori Matt Adamczyk OPEN (R) 44.8% 48.8% 6.4% -4.0% WI-01 Rob Zerban Paul Ryan R 36.5% 63.5% N/A -27.0% WI-02 Mark Pocan Peter Theron D 68.5% 31.5% N/A 37.0% WI-03 Ron Kind Tony Kurtz D 56.7% 43.3% N/A 13.4% WI-04 Gwen Moore Dan Sebring D 70.3% 26.9% 2.8% 43.4% WI-05 Chris Rockwood Jim Sensenbrenner R 30.5% 69.5% N/A -39.0% WI-06 Mark Harris Glenn Grothman OPEN (R) 40.9% 56.8% 2.3% -15.9% WI-07 Kelly Westlund Sean Duffy R 39.5% 59.2% 1.3% -19.7% WI-08 Ron Gruett Reid Ribble R 34.9% 65.1% N/A -30.2% State Senate 6 seats 11 seats R 14 D 19 R 0 I R+1 State House 38 seats 60 seats R 36 D 63 R* 0 I R+3 Sources: “Wisconsin: AP Election Results,” Associated Press, accessed November 5, 2014, at 12:31 p.m.; “Wisconsin: AP Election Results,” Associated Press, accessed Friday, November 7, 2014; Patrick Marley, “GOP increases its majorities in Wisconsin Legislature,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, November 6, 2014.

* As of Friday November 7th, two races are still uncalled but Republicans lead in both. If their leads hold, Republicans will control 63 seats in the chamber.

REGISTRATION OVERVIEW Wisconsin is not a party registration state, and party ID is not available on the state voter file. Because of the lack of party registration and partisan primary vote history, identifying supporters in Wisconsin is challenging. As of November 1, 2014, there were 3,391,118 registered voters in Wisconsin.12

TURNOUT ANALYSIS Wisconsin is one of the highest-turnout states in the country. In 2012, only neighboring Minnesota had a higher rate, and the state performed almost as comparatively well in 2010 when only four states had higher turnout. The difference between turnout rates in 2010 and 2012, however, is quite stark. In 2010, 52.0% of Wisconsin’s voting-eligible population turned out to vote, which was an almost 20% drop from the 72.9% of voting eligible residents who voted in 2012. 13

Turnout rates are distributed evenly throughout the state. In 2012, the highest turnout counties were a mix of liberal and conservative strongholds that included some of the state’s most populated counties. Waukesha County, a crucial GOP stronghold that includes the Western Milwaukee suburbs, was the second-highest turnout county at 81% of its VAP, while liberal Dane County— which includes Madison—had the fourth-highest turnout (79% of its VAP casted votes). Both Dane and Waukesha are also the second and third most populous counties in the state, respectively. Milwaukee County, the most populous of the state’s 72 counties, had a turnout rate that matched the

12 “November 1, 2014 Voter Registration Statistics,” Government Accountability Board, November 1, 2014. 13 “Voter Turnout,” United States Elections Project, accessed October 27, 2014.

state average at just over 69% of its VAP. Only Menominee County—the smallest in the state— registered a VAP turnout rate below 50%.14

According to preliminary statistics, Wisconsin posted the second-highest turnout in the nation in this year’s election. As of November 5th, 56.7% of Wisconsin’s voting eligible population turned out to vote, a rate that only Maine exceeded.15

Wisconsin VEP Turnout Since 2008 VEP Highest- VEP Turnout National VEP Year VEP Office Turnout Rate Turnout Rate 2008 4,120,694 2,983,417 72.4% 61.6% 2010 4,172,130 2,171,331 52.0% 40.9% 2012 4,208,757 3,068,434 72.9% 58.0% 2014 4,265,187 2,425,000 56.9% 36.6% Difference from 2010 93,057 253,669 4.9% -4.3% Difference from 2012 56,430 -643,434 -16.0% -21.4% Source: “Voter Turnout,” United States Elections Project, accessed November 5, 2014.

ABSENTEE/EARLY VOTING Wisconsin is a no-excuse absentee voting state.16 Voters have the option to either send in an absentee vote by mail or they can cast it in-person at a municipal clerk’s office. In-person absentee voting began on Monday, October 20th and ended on Friday, October 31st.17

While voters do not need to cite a reason for requesting absentee ballots, a new, heavily-litigated voter ID law had complicated the early voting process. The law included a provision that required absentee voters to present a photo ID. In-person absentee voters would have been required to present the ID as they voted at a municipal clerk’s office and voters who requested a ballot by mail would have had to send a photo ID (or a copy of one) with their request. 18 On Thursday, October 8th, however, the United States Supreme Court stopped election officials from implementing those requirements.19

Wisconsin Method of Vote Since 2008 Election Total Absentee Absentee Election Day Year Day Voters Votes % Registration% Registrations 2008 2,996,869 647,175 21.6% 459,549 15.3% 2010 2,185,017 230,744 10.6% 1,954,273 10.5% 2012 3,080,628 664,597 21.6% 337,033 10.9% 2014 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Source: “Absentee Voting,” Wisconsin Government Accountability Board, accessed October 7, 2014.

14 “Wisconsin Voter Turnout Statistics,” Wisconsin Government Accountability Board, accessed October 2, 2014. 15 “2014 November General Election Turnout Rates,” United States Elections Projects, accessed November 5, 2014. 16 “I want to vote absentee,” Wisconsin Government Accountability Board, accessed October 2, 2014. 17 “In-Person Absentee (Early) Voting Starts Today,” Wisconsin Government Accountability Board, accessed November 4, 2014. 18 “Absentee Voting,” Wisconsin Government Accountability Board, accessed October 7, 2014. 19 Adam Liptak, “Courts Strike Down Voter ID Laws in Wisconsin and Texas,” New York Times, October 9, 2014.

REGIONAL ANALYSIS Wisconsin’s two largest cities—Milwaukee and Madison—are Democratic strongholds that include a high concentration of the state’s Democratic voters. Republicans are more spread out throughout the state but also dominate in the western Milwaukee suburbs. Milwaukee’s southern suburbs in Racine County are more Democratic, as is Kenosha County, which is part of the northernmost part of the Chicago metropolitan area. While Democrats almost always win by big margins in Milwaukee and Dane, the two counties that contain the City of Milwaukee and Madison, Racine and Kenosha are more competitive, especially in off-year elections.20

The counties surrounding the Fox Valley comprise the most evenly divided region of the state, while Democrats enjoy a modest advantage in the largely rural Western and Southwestern counties that make up Democratic Congressman Ron Kind’s Congressional District.21 Democrats also have other pockets of strength throughout rural Wisconsin, including the far-northern counties that border the Duluth area in neighboring Minnesota and Lake Superior.22

ELECTION LAW IMPACTS Republican lawmakers passed a controversial bill in 2011 that significantly changed election administration in Wisconsin. Voters must reside at their current address for 28 days, a change from the previous requirement of 10 days. Proof of residence is also required and can no longer be verified by a corroborating witness alone.23

Electors must now sign a poll list, which will be held by the county clerk, before being issued a ballot.24

The time period for voting in-person absentee was shortened from 30 days to two weeks before the election. In-person absentee is no longer allowed on the Saturday, Sunday or Monday before Election Day.25

The new law also added a controversial photo identification requirement that was set to go into effect for this first time this November. On March 6, 2012, Dane County Circuit Judge David Flanagan issued a temporary injunction against this part of the 2011 law.26 Less than a week later, in a separate case, Dane County Circuit Judge Richard Niess issued a permanent injunction against it.27 Then, in April 2014, U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman also struck down the photo identification requirement and issued a separate federal injunction.28

Since Adelman’s April ruling, however, the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the photo identification requirement is constitutional, which set up the law to take effect in this year’s general election. Going into the election, University of Georgia statistics professor M.V. Hood estimated that the law would disenfranchise around 170,000 voters, or just under 5% of Wisconsin’s registered voters.29

20 Atlas Online Toolkit, Election Results module, accessed 11/7/14. 21 Craig Gilbert, “Wisconsin's red-blue swings offer a map to victory for each party,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, October 18, 2014. 22 Atlas Online Toolkit, Maps Module, accessed 11/2/14. 23 Jessica Karls Ruplinger, “Recent Election Law Changes,” Wisconsin Legislative Council Information Memorandum, July 11, 2011. 24 Jessica Karls Ruplinger, “Recent Election Law Changes,” Wisconsin Legislative Council Information Memorandum, July 11, 2011. 25 Jessica Karls Ruplinger, “Recent Election Law Changes,” Wisconsin Legislative Council Information Memorandum, July 11, 2011. 26 Jeff Mayers, “Judge temporarily blocks Wisconsin voter ID law,” Reuters, March 7, 2012. 27 “Judge rules voter ID law is unconstitutional; permanently bars implementation,” Wisconsin State Journal, March 13, 2012 28 Patrick Marley, “Federal judge strikes down Wisconsin's voter ID law,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, April 29, 2014 29 Claire Groden, “Scott Walker Could Win Thanks to Wisconsin's Voter ID Law,” The New Republic, October 6, 2014

The legal saga continued into late October when the United States Supreme Court put the law on hold. The hold finally prevented what a Minnesota newspaper called the state’s “on-again, off-again voter ID law” from going into effect this cycle.30

EXIT POLLING

RACE

Wisconsin is a predominantly white state. According to the American Community Survey, non- Hispanic whites comprise 83.4% of the state’s VAP. Wisconsin’s white vote is more Democratic than the white electorate in most states. In 2012, President Obama barely lost the white vote with 48%, compared to his 39% nationally.31 That was a substantial drop-off from his 2008 victory in the state, when he won the white vote 54%-45%.32 Meanwhile, Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett won just 43% of white voters in 2010 and in the 2012 recall election.33

Despite Wisconsin’s relatively low percentage of racial minorities, President Obama’s 2012 victory demonstrates how Democrats who run up overwhelming margins with African American and Latino voters can afford to lose the white vote. African American voters in Wisconsin make up only 6.1% of the state’s VAP but they are overwhelmingly Democratic.34 According to exit polls, African Americans comprised 4% of the total ballots cast in 2010 but in 2012, they exceeded their share of the VAP and accounted for 7% of voters.35

Latinos, the next largest minority group in the state, represent only 5.9% of the VAP but their share of the electorate has increased over the past decade from just 2.9% in 2000 to 4% of the electorate in 2012.3637

This year’s racial breakdown was in line with previous cycles. Burke handily won the state’s small African American vote that’s concentrated within the Milwaukee area while losing whites by close to the same margin that Tom Barrett did in his unsuccessful races against Walker.

Successful statewide Democrats in Wisconsin need at least 47% of the white vote. In addition to Senator Baldwin in 2012, John Kerry also received 47% of this demographic in his razor-thin, 11,000 vote margin of victory in Wisconsin during the 2004 presidential election.38 The overwhelmingly white makeup of the state’s electorate means that Democrats must consistently get a larger share of white votes than they do in other more racially diverse states.

30 Andy Rathbun, “Wisconsin's on-again, off-again voter ID law is off,” Pioneer Press, October 18, 2014 31 Wisconsin President Exit Polls, CNN, November 2, 2012. 32 Wisconsin President Exit Polls, CNN, November 4, 2008. 33 Wisconsin President Exit Polls, CNN, November 2, 2010; “Wisconsin Recall Exit Polls: How Different Groups Voted,” New York Times, accessed October 7, 2014. 34 Voting Age Population by Citizenship and Race (CVAP): 2008-2012 American Community Survey 5 year estimates, Wisconsin, U.S. Census Bureau, accessed October 6, 2014. 35 Wisconsin President Exit Polls, CNN, November 2, 2010; Wisconsin President Exit Polls, CNN, November 2, 2012. 36 Voting-Age Population and Citizen Voting-Age Population by Sex, for the United States and States: 2000, U.S Census Bureau, March 4, 2004. 37 “Statistics: Population and Vital Statistics,” Wisconsin Blue Book, accessed October 6, 2014. 38 Atlas Online Toolkit, Election Results module, accessed 11/9/14; “Wisconsin President Exit Polls,” CNN, November 2, 2004.

Wisconsin Performance and Vote Share by Race Barrett Obama Barrett Feingold Obama Baldwin Burke Race 2012 2008 2010 2010 2012 2012 2014 (Recall) Performance by Race (Exit Polls) White 54% 43% 44% 43% 48% 47% 42% African American 91% 87% 86% 94% 94% 91% 90% Hispanic N/A N/A N/A N/A 66% 63% N/A Asian N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Other N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Vote Share by Race (Exit Polls) White 89% 90% 90% 91% 86% 87% 88% African American 5% 4% 4% 5% 7% 7% 6% Hispanic 3% 4% 4% N/A 4% 4% 3% Asian 1% 1% 1% N/A 1% 1% 1% Other 2% 1% 1% 5% 2% 2% 2% Sources: “Wisconsin President Exit Poll,” CNN, November 4, 2008; “Wisconsin Governor Exit Poll,” CNN, November 2, 2010; “Wisconsin Senate Exit Poll,” CNN, accessed November 2, 2010; “Wisconsin Recall Exit Polls,” New York Times, June 5, 2012; “Wisconsin President Exit Poll,” CNN, November 6, 2012; “Wisconsin Senate Exit Poll,” CNN, November 6, 2012; “Wisconsin Governor Exit Poll,” CNN, accessed November 5, 2014.

GENDER

A notable gender gap shows up in Wisconsin’s recent statewide election results. In 2010, Scott Walker won men 57% to 42% but lost women by three points to Tom Barrett.39 The recall election was no different—Walker won men by almost 20 points, while Barrett won women 52-47%. Obama’s two elections in Wisconsin reflect a similar trend. In 2008, he won 60% of women while winning the state with 56% of the overall vote statewide.40 For the past four cycles, the female share of the vote has remained steady and has not fluctuated outside of the 50-51% range.

Wisconsin consistently registers a gender gap in its statewide races, especially in off-year elections, and the difference between Mary Burke’s performance among men and women was especially strong. According to Edson Research exit poll of the race, she received less than 40% of the male vote, which is lower than any statewide Democrat going back to the 2008 cycle.

Although Burke won a majority of women, she still slightly underperformed recent successful statewide Democrats. In 2012, President Obama and Senator Tammy Baldwin won 57% and 56% of women, respectively, while President Obama won six in ten women in his decisive 2008 victory. In conjunction with her underperformance with men, her failure to match recent Democratic margins with women contributed to her defeat.

39 “Wisconsin Governor Exit Polls,” CNN, November 2, 2010. 40 “Wisconsin President Exit Polls,” CNN, November 4, 2008.

Wisconsin Performance and Vote Share by Gender Barrett Obama Barrett Feingold Obama Baldwin Burke Gender 2012 2008 2010 2010 2012 2012 2014 (Recall) Performance by Gender (Exit Polls) Women 60% 51% 52% 52% 57% 56% 54% Men 53% 42% 42% 40% 47% 46% 39% Vote Share by Gender (Exit Polls) Women 51% 50% 50% 50% 51% 51% 51% Men 49% 50% 50% 50% 49% 49% 49% Sources: “Wisconsin President Exit Poll,” CNN, November 4, 2008; “Wisconsin Governor Exit Poll,” CNN, November 2, 2010; “Wisconsin Senate Exit Poll,” CNN, accessed November 2, 2010; “Wisconsin Recall Exit Polls,” New York Times, June 5, 2012; “Wisconsin President Exit Poll,” CNN, November 6, 2012; “Wisconsin Senate Exit Poll,” CNN, November 6, 2012; “Wisconsin Governor Exit Poll,” CNN, accessed November 5, 2014.

UNION MEMBERSHIP

Union membership and support has long been a key to Democratic success in Wisconsin. According to exit polls, support for Democratic candidates since 2008 has been much higher from self-reported union households than from non-union households and consistently registered just over 59%. Meanwhile, in every statewide election since 2008, non-union households’ support for Democrats has consistently lagged behind their unionized counterparts, usually by at least a double digit margin.41

Although union households are still a major reservoir of Democratic votes, layoffs, cutbacks and Governor Walker’s assault on collective bargaining have shrunk the pool of union voters. The union household share of the electorate in CNN’s 2010 exit poll was 26% of voters but that dropped to 21% in the 2012 exit poll.42 Act 10 has been especially perilous for public employee unions, whose members shrunk from 46.6% of the state’s public employees in 2010 to just 35.8% in 2013. Meanwhile, the percentage of private sector union members has remained steady at just over 8%. 43Despite the loss of members, the self-identified union household share of the vote remained constant in the 2014 election at 21%. And union household voters rewarded Democrats at the top of the ticket (Burke and Baldwin) with 65% of their votes.

41 “Wisconsin President Exit Poll,” CNN, November 4, 2008; “Wisconsin Governor Exit Poll,” CNN, November 2, 2010; “Wisconsin Senate Exit Poll,” CNN, accessed November 2, 2010; “Wisconsin Recall Exit Polls,” New York Times, June 5, 2012; “Wisconsin President Exit Poll,” CNN, November 6, 2012; “Wisconsin Senate Exit Poll,” CNN, November 6, 2012; “Wisconsin Governor Exit Poll,” CNN, accessed November 5, 2014. 42 “Wisconsin President Exit Polls,” CNN, November 6, 2012. 43 “Union Membership, Coverage, Density and Employment by State, 2013,” Georgia State University, accessed October 7, 2012.

Wisconsin Performance and Vote Share by Union Affiliation Barrett Obama Barrett Feingold Obama Baldwin Burke Union Affiliation 2012 2008 2010 2010 2012 2012 2014 (Recall) Performance by Union Affiliation (Exit Polls) Union Member 64% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Union Household 61% 63% 59% 62% 66% 65% 65% Vote Share by Union Affiliation (Exit Polls) Union Member 12% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Union Household 26% 26% 26% 33% 21% 21% 21% Sources: “Wisconsin President Exit Poll,” CNN, November 4, 2008; “Wisconsin Governor Exit Poll,” CNN, November 2, 2010; “Wisconsin Senate Exit Poll,” CNN, accessed November 2, 2010; “Wisconsin Recall Exit Polls,” New York Times, June 5, 2012; “Wisconsin President Exit Poll,” CNN, November 6, 2012; “Wisconsin Senate Exit Poll,” CNN, November 6, 2012; “Wisconsin Governor Exit Poll,” CNN, accessed November 5, 2014.

PARTISANSHIP (SELF-ID)

Wisconsin is a polarized state where Democrats usually outnumber Republicans by a slight margin. Both Scott Walker and Ron Johnson owe their 2010 victories to their strong performance with independents. In this year’s election, Walker beat Burke with independents by eleven points.44 Although a less Republican electorate shows up in Presidential years, the off-year partisan breakdown of Wisconsin voters has been relatively consistent since Walker came into office. Like 2010 and the 2012 recall, this year’s election featured a roughly equal number of Democratic and Republican voters with slightly fewer independents who made up the remainder of the electorate.

Since the 2008 election, successful statewide Democrats in Wisconsin have received at least 48- 49% of self-identified independents. In his three elections since 2010, Governor Walker has maintained a crucial advantage with this demographic, which never gave Barrett or Burke more than 45% of its vote. In his 2010 re-election campaign, Senator Russ Feingold also lost while getting only 43% of independents. For Burke to have won, she would have had to improve upon Barrett’s previous margins with independent voters against Walker.

44 “Wisconsin Governor Exit Poll,” CNN, accessed November 5, 2014.

Wisconsin Performance and Vote Share by Party ID Barrett Obama Barrett Feingold Obama Baldwin Burke Party ID 2012 2008 2010 2010 2012 2012 2014 (Recall) Performance by Party ID (Exit Polls) Democrat 95% 90% 92% 91% 95% 93% 93% Republican 10% 5% 5% 6% 5% 6% 4% Independent 58% 42% 43% 45% 49% 48% 43% Share of Vote by Party ID (Exit Polls) Democrat 39% 37% 37% 34% 37% 37% 36% Republican 33% 36% 36% 35% 32% 32% 37% Independent 29% 27% 28% 31% 31% 31% 27% Sources: “Wisconsin President Exit Poll,” CNN, November 4, 2008; “Wisconsin Governor Exit Poll,” CNN, November 2, 2010; “Wisconsin Senate Exit Poll,” CNN, accessed November 2, 2010; “Wisconsin Recall Exit Polls,” New York Times, June 5, 2012; “Wisconsin President Exit Poll,” CNN, November 6, 2012; “Wisconsin Senate Exit Poll,” CNN, November 6, 2012; “Wisconsin Governor Exit Poll,” CNN, accessed November 5, 2014.

AGE

Young voters are the most Democratic in the state. In the 2010 and in the 2012 recall, 18-29 year olds were the only age demographic to vote for Tom Barrett and the same held true for Mary Burke this year.45 In 2008 and 2012, young voters made up a slightly larger share of the electorate than they did in the intervening off-year elections. This year’s breakdown was similar to previous midterm elections, although the share of the 18-29 year-old vote share increased from 2010. Burke underperformed among 18-29 year olds, winning just 51%, compared to Obama ’08, 64%, Obama ’12, 60% and Baldwin ’12, 58%. Burke also lagged behind every recent Democratic statewide winner among every age cohort.

45 “Wisconsin Recall Exit Polls: How Different Groups Voted,” New York Times, accessed October 7, 2014; “Wisconsin Governor Exit Polls,” CNN, November 2, 2010.

Wisconsin Performance and Vote Share by Age Barrett Obama Barrett Johnson Obama Baldwin Burke Age 2012 2008 2010 2010 2012 2012 2014 (Recall) Performance by Age (Exit Polls) 18–29 64% 55% 53% 51% 60% 58% 51% 30–44 54% 43% 43% 43% 51% 50% 47% 45–64 57% 46% 47% 47% 51% 50% 45% 65+ 50% 44% 46% 44% 48% 49% 46% Vote Share by Age (Exit Polls) 18–29 22% 15% 15% 16% 21% 20% 18% 30–44 29% 23% 23% 22% 26% 26% 22% 45–64 35% 46% 45% 44% 37% 37% 42% 65+ 14% 16% 17% 18% 16% 17% 18% Sources: “Wisconsin President Exit Poll,” CNN, November 4, 2008; “Wisconsin Governor Exit Poll,” CNN, November 2, 2010; “Wisconsin Senate Exit Poll,” CNN, accessed November 2, 2010; “Wisconsin Recall Exit Polls,” New York Times, June 5, 2012; “Wisconsin President Exit Poll,” CNN, November 6, 2012; “Wisconsin Senate Exit Poll,” CNN, November 6, 2012; “Wisconsin Governor Exit Poll,” CNN, accessed November 5, 2014.

GOVERNOR

On April 15, 2014, Governor Scott Walker formally announced that he would be running for re- election, marking his third campaign in four years. In 2012, Walker won a high-profile recall election, where he beat Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett 53.1% to 46.3%. Walker also faced Barrett in his first election for governor in 2010, which he won by a similar 52.3% to 46.5% margin.46 As these results would suggest, Walker’s approval rating is highly polarized. According to the Marquette University Law School poll, between January 2012 and August 2014, Walker’s approval rating has never dipped below 47% or increased above 51%.47 He got up to 52% in September but dipped back down in the university’s mid-October poll.48

Initially, many of the state’s highest profile Democrats were reluctant to challenge Walker after his recall victory.49 In October 2013, former Trek bicycle executive and Madison school board member Mary Burke entered the race and easily won the Democratic nomination over Madison state Representative Brett Hulsey. Burke is a relative newcomer to public office and was elected to the Madison school board in 2012. Before that, she served as former Governor Jim Doyle’s Secretary of Commerce, an appointed position in a department that Governor Walker abolished in 2011.50 Burke is from a wealthy background; her father founded Trek, the Madison-based bicycle company that she previously worked for, and her family is worth millions.51

Unlike the 2012 recall effort, Burke’s campaign did not try to make the election a referendum on Walker’s anti-union agenda. Instead, she presented herself as a moderate businesswoman who

46 Atlas Online Toolkit, Election Results module, accessed 10/22/14 47 Harry Enten, “Despite A Strange Poll, Scott Walker’s Still The Favorite To Win In Wisconsin,” FiveThirtyEight, August 28, 2014 48 “Marquette Law School Poll – September 25-28, 2014,” Marquette University Law School, accessed October 29, 2014; “Marquette Law School Poll – October 9-12, 2014,” Marquette University Law School, accessed October 29, 2014. 49 Jason Stein, “Few Democrats lining up to challenge Walker in 2014,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, December 15, 2012. 50 Zac Schultz, “UPDATE: Commerce Department Reorganization Criticized,” WMTV, February 11, 2011. 51 Daniel Bice, “Burke, family paid $1.7 million in 2012 state income taxes,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, August 2, 2014.

attempted to appeal to the state’s less liberal off-year electorate.52 This approach was evident in an online video that Burke released shortly after she entered the race that criticized the status quo in Madison of “pulling our state apart and our economy down.”53

As soon as Burke entered the race, Walker’s campaign immediately began to tie her to Doyle, who left office with a low approval rating while the state recovered from the Great Recession.54 In response to those attacks, Burke’s campaign juxtaposed her extensive business experience in the private sector against Wisconsin’s sluggish job growth under Governor Walker.55 This conversation about the state’s overall economy assumed a paramount role in the election, with Burke mostly on offense and Walker on defense about the state’s slow job growth. Walker was briefly able to put Burke on the defensive, however, after Buzzfeed reported that one of Burke’s political consultants had allegedly plagiarized parts of the campaign’s jobs plan.56

Walker, though, was not without his bruising news cycles amidst a John Doe investigation into a campaign finance scandal that dates back to the 2012 recall election. In June 2014, prosecutors unsealed documents that allege Walker was at the center of “a criminal scheme” to bypass state election laws. According to prosecutors in the ongoing investigation, Walker and his aides illegally raised money and coordinated spending through 12 conservative groups during the recall.57 The scandal was a recurring news story throughout the campaign and two weeks before Election Day, Milwaukee County released thousands of emails that prosecutors had collected in the investigation.58

Walker significantly outraised Burke but an August Milwaukee Journal Sentinel article notes that Burke raised more money than “past challengers to incumbent governors in Wisconsin.”59 Burke’s personal fortune was a factor in the $15 million that she raised for the campaign which included a late infusion of $5 million of her own wealth that she announced in late October.60 Walker’s campaign, on the other hand, raised about $25 million for the cycle.61

Outside groups also spent heavily on the race, including pro-choice groups like NARAL, which assisted with mailings and field efforts. Meanwhile, EMILY’s List supported Burke with millions of dollars in television ads.62 Unions also gave generously to the Greater Wisconsin Political Fund, an outside group that ran several ads against Walker.63

Walker began the race with a small but consistent lead in the polls. The first public poll of the race in September 2013 from Public Policy Polling had Walker leading Burke 48-42. With the exception of one outlier that Wisconsin Public Radio commissioned in March, Walker’s lead had shrunk by the spring, and in July, Burke led in her first public poll of the race. After a We Ask America poll showed Burke with a four point lead in early September, Walker regained ground and led in the next four

52 David Lauter, “In Wisconsin, Democrats try moderation in fight with Scott Walker,” Los Angeles Times, October 10, 2014. 53 Sean Sullivan, “Mary Burke announces run against Scott Walker,” Washington Post, October 7, 2013. 54 Judith Davidoff, “Jim Doyle’s final report card,” The Capital Times, October 5, 2014. 55 Jason Stein, “Mary Burke announces candidacy to challenge Scott Walker for governor,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, October 7, 2013. 56 Andrew Kaczynski, “Mary Burke Dismisses Latest Plagiarism Examples: ‘Very Small Passages,’ ‘Extremely Limited’,” Buzzfeed, September 22, 2014. 57 Patrick Marley, “John Doe prosecutors allege Scott Walker at center of 'criminal scheme’,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, June 19, 2014. 58 Bill Glauber and Daniel Bice, “Milwaukee County releases 16,000 emails collected in John Doe probe,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, October 21, 2014. 59 Jason Stein, “Scott Walker raised more from outside Wisconsin in July than Mary Burke,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, August 5, 2014. 60 “Burke puts $5 million into governor's race,” Associated Press, October 27, 2014 61 Scott Bauer, “Burke, Walker haul in big bucks as election nears,” Associated Press, October 28, 2014 62 “Wisconsin's Burke, Walker try to win over women,” The Post Crescent, October 5, 2014 63 Daniel Bice, “Union bosses, wealthy donors spend big for Mary Burke, Scott Walker,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, October 26, 2014

polls that month.64 All of the polls in October were within the margin of error, although a final Marquette University Law School poll at the end of the month showed Walker with a seven point lead, his largest since the spring.65

In conjunction with the polls, the race appeared to be especially close after Walker publicly complained about the Republican Governors Association’s lack of involvement in his race. During the last week of October, Walker complained that he was getting outspent on the air and he criticized the RGA and its chairman, Chris Christie, for appearing in the state as a surrogate instead of spending some much-needed money on television ads.66 Despite Walker’s anxiety, he went on to comfortably dispatch Burke, whose 52.3%-46.6% loss closely mirrored the results from Tom Barrett’s unsuccessful campaigns against Walker.67

Wisconsin Governor 2014 Public Polling68

64 “Wisconsin Governor - Walker vs. Burke,” Real Clear Politics, accessed October 7, 2014 65 “Wisconsin Governor - Walker vs. Burke,” Real Clear Politics, Real Clear Politics, accessed October 30, 2014 66 Alexander Burns, “Scott Walker to Chris Christie: Thanks for nothing,” Politico, October 27, 2014 67 “Wisconsin: AP Election Results,” Associated Press, accessed November 5, 2014, at 12:31 p.m. 68 Atlas Online Toolkit, Charts module, accessed 11/6/14.

Wisconsin Governor Polling Accuracy

Pollster Dates Sample Burke % Walker %

YouGov 10/25-10/31 1,494 43% 45% Marquette University 10/23-10/26 1,164 43% 50% CBS/NYT/YouGov 10/16-10/23 3,308 45% 46% Rasmussen Reports 10/20-10/21 973 49% 48% Real Clear Politics Average N/A N/A 47.5% 45.3% Final Results N/A N/A 52.3% 46.6% Difference N/A N/A +4.8% -1.3% Source: “Wisconsin Governor - Walker vs. Burke,” Real Clear Politics, accessed November 5, 2014.

Wisconsin Governor 2014 Results Registered Total Walker Other Burke Votes Burke % Walker % Other % Voters Voters Votes Votes 3,391,118 2,395,963 1,115,943 46.6% 1,252,750 52.3% 27,270 1.1% Sources: “Wisconsin: AP Election Results,” Associated Press, accessed November 5, 2014, at 12:31 p.m.; “November 1, 2014 Voter Registration Statistics,” Wisconsin Government Accountability Board, November 1, 2014

MEDIA SPENDING ANALYSIS The media spending numbers in this section are from CMAG and consist of broadcast television data only. Costs are estimates as of November 5, 2014. All data is copyright 2014 by Kantar Media Intelligence. All rights reserved.

The pro-Walker outside group Right Direction Wisconsin PAC aired the first ad of the cycle in February 2014. The ad ran in the relatively small La Crosse, Green Bay, and Wausau markets. The Burke and Walker campaigns also restricted their first ads to those same small markets. Right Direction Wisconsin spent around $119,000 on these first ads, while the Burke campaign spent about $70,000. Walker, meanwhile, only spent about $26,000 on his initial March buy. He followed that up with a slightly larger buy in mid-April that touted his economic record.69

Ad spending for the Walker and Burke campaigns increased drastically starting in June. That month, both campaigns ran their first broadcast ads in the Milwaukee market, which is by far the state’s largest, and Madison, which is the most Democratic. That month, Walker spent just over $280,000 to an estimated $142,000 for Burke. Walker’s advantage on the air would continue into the summer— from July 1st through September 30th, Walker had spent an estimated $3.5 million dollars on 10,245 broadcast television ads to an estimated $3.3 million for 11,709 broadcast spots for Burke.70

During this time, the campaigns were running the majority of ads, although the pro-Burke, union- backed Greater Wisconsin Committee went on the air in late August and spent an estimated $1.6 million by the end of September. Meanwhile, Right Direction Wisconsin PAC resumed its ad spending in September, spending an estimated $311,000 on 451 ads for the month. Walker also

69 CMAG data, accessed November 5, 2014. Copyright 2014 by Kantar Media Intelligence. All rights reserved. 70 CMAG data, accessed November 5, 2014. Copyright 2014 by Kantar Media Intelligence. All rights reserved.

benefited from the National Rifle Association, which spent an estimated $123,000 in support of Walker during the month of September.71

Aside from the early focus on the outstate markets, the campaigns’ ad spending was distributed throughout each of the the state’s media markets. Spending significantly increased in September and October with Burke’s campaign and the union-backed Greater Wisconsin Committee spending an estimated $2.8 million, which exceeded the $2.4 million that Republican groups spent.72 .

Wisconsin Governor Broadcast-Media Spot Counts, March 1-November 4, 2014

Conservative

Progressive

0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000

71 CMAG data, accessed November 5, 2014. Copyright 2014 by Kantar Media Intelligence. All rights reserved. 72 CMAG data, accessed November 6, 2014. Copyright 2014 by Kantar Media Intelligence. All rights reserved.

Wisconsin Governor Estimated Broadcast-Media Spending, March 1-November 4, 2014

Conservative

Progressive

$0 $5,000,000 $10,000,000 $15,000,000

MESSAGING

Mary Burke’s campaign aired her first ad on March 7, 2014. The mostly positive spot highlighted her business experience and her work as Wisconsin’s Commerce Secretary. It also briefly juxtaposed those positives against the state’s sluggish economy that Governor Walker had presided over. The ad only ran in three of the state’s cheaper, largely rural markets—Green Bay, La Crosse and Wausau. Walker immediately countered with his first ad of the cycle that appeared in those same small markets. It cited competing statistics that said the state’s unemployment rate has decreased under his watch.73

Walker’s campaign dominated the airwaves in the spring. In April, he ran two ads, one positive and one negative. Without referencing Burke or Doyle, the positive spot reminded voters about a deficit that the state faced when Walker came into office and cited some statistics to indicate that Wisconsin had recovered during his tenure. Meanwhile, the negative spot explicitly tried to tie Burke to former Governor Jim Doyle and some of the more unpopular perceptions surrounding his administration that blamed him for the late-2000s economic downturn.74

In the summer, Burke aired a series of negative ads against Walker that criticized the state’s slow job growth. In one ad that debuted at the end of July, Burke specifically mentions a pledge Walker made during his 2010 campaign when he promised to create 250,000 new jobs by the end of his term.75 Walker defended himself in an ad that pictured him in a ditch talking about how his predecessor, Governor Doyle, had dug the state into a “pretty big hole” while accusing Burke of

73 CMAG data, accessed November 5, 2014. Copyright 2014 by Kantar Media Intelligence. All rights reserved. 74 CMAG data, accessed November 5, 2014. Copyright 2014 by Kantar Media Intelligence. All rights reserved. 75 CMAG data, accessed November 5, 2014. Copyright 2014 by Kantar Media Intelligence. All rights reserved.

supporting his policies.76 Burke responded directly to that ad in a spot that charged Walker with supporting tax cuts to the wealthy without creating jobs.77

Walker continued to highlight Burke’s connection to Doyle, and in late October, he aired an ad that mentioned the 130,000 jobs that the state lost under his tenure. Meanwhile Burke’s message about the state’s struggling economy remained consistent as she lambasted Walker’s purported “Wisconsin Comeback” in an ad that unfavorably compared the state’s economy to neighboring Minnesota’s.78

In addition to the economy, Burke and her allies also attacked Walker’s opposition to abortion in the final stretch of the campaign. EMILY’s List ran an ad that premiered on October 21st that mentioned his opposition even in cases of rape and incest. Burke also aired an ad that pointed out Walker’s position on the issue. Governor Walker attempted to soften his image with a spot in early October where he expressed sympathy for a woman making the “agonizing” decision to get an abortion.79

Other late ads included an October 30th buy from the Greater Wisconsin Political Committee that criticized Walker for cutting education funding.80 Burke also aired a late October ad that included a mother talking about how Walker’s education cuts have adversely affected her children while also mentioning her frustration with the corruption allegations against Walker.81

Top Issues in Partisan Messaging Issue Democrat Republican Total Economy 61% 62% 61% Education 17% 3% 12% Social Issues 14% 3% 10% Health Care 0% 15% 5% Other 8% 17% 11% Source: CMAG data, accessed November 6, 2014. Copyright 2014 by Kantar Media Intelligence. All rights reserved.

The above chart gives a breakdown of the top issues that appeared in broadcast media ads since the August 12th primary election. Burke tried to make the election a referendum on the state’s economy and throughout the campaign, Walker never hesitated to defend his record on the air. While Burke complemented her overriding message about the economy with several ads about abortion and women’s rights, Walker similarly used health care as a wedge issue as he sought to tie Burke to the Affordable Care Act.82

GEOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS Burke underperformed Obama’s 2012 numbers almost everywhere. Milwaukee County—the state’s largest and the source of the most raw votes for statewide Democrats—gave Burke almost 100,000 fewer votes than Obama while she received 62.9%% of the vote to his 67.5%.83 Burke’s drop-off was less steep in Dane County, which includes Madison and represents another important

76 CMAG data, accessed November 5, 2014. Copyright 2014 by Kantar Media Intelligence. All rights reserved. 77 CMAG data, accessed November 5, 2014. Copyright 2014 by Kantar Media Intelligence. All rights reserved. 78 CMAG data, accessed October 30, 2014. Copyright 2014 by Kantar Media Intelligence. All rights reserved. 79 CMAG data, accessed November 3, 2014. Copyright 2014 by Kantar Media Intelligence. All rights reserved. 80 CMAG data, accessed November 3, 2014. Copyright 2014 by Kantar Media Intelligence. All rights reserved. 81 CMAG data, accessed November 3, 2014. Copyright 2014 by Kantar Media Intelligence. All rights reserved. 82 CMAG data, accessed November 6, 2014. Copyright 2014 by Kantar Media Intelligence. All rights reserved. 83 Atlas Online Toolkit, Election Results module, accessed 11/5/14; “Governor Election Results,” New York Times, accessed November 5, 2014, at 11:25 p.m.

Democratic stronghold. There, she received about 175,000 votes to the President’s 215,000 in 2012. Her margin was also virtually the same—she got 69.7% of the vote to his 71.0%.84

In addition to her failure to maximize support in Milwaukee County, Burke also underperformed Obama throughout the more rural parts of the state. Burke decisively lost the counties in the state’s competitive Fox Valley region, which includes the mid-sized cities of Appleton and Green Bay in the north-central part of the state. In 2012, Obama barely lost Brown County—the home of Green Bay— 50.3% to 48.5%. Meanwhile, Burke only received 40.7% of the county’s votes. Burke also underperformed Obama in the rural, Democratic Southwestern part of the state in addition to Kenosha and Racine Counties just south of Milwaukee.85 Obama carried both Kenosha and Racine but Burke lost them both. She also lost three counties in the Southwestern corner of the state while Obama won each county in the region.86

As most statewide Democrats do in elections, Burke lost a significant amount of ground to Walker in Waukesha County, which she lost 72.5%-27.8%.87 In order to win Wisconsin, Democrats must dampen Republican margins in the GOP’s stronghold counties while also maintaining a respectable showing in the state’s most competitive rural counties. Off-year drop-off in Milwaukee and Dane is also problematic for Democrats and at least partially explains why Walker has become an illusive target for the party.

Burke 2014 Performance by County

84 Atlas Online Toolkit, Election Results module, accessed 11/5/14; “Governor Election Results,” New York Times, accessed November 5, 2014, at 11:25 p.m. 85 Atlas Online Toolkit, Election Results module, accessed 11/5/14; “Governor Election Results,” New York Times, accessed November 5, 2014, at 11:25 p.m. 86 Atlas Online Toolkit, Election Results module, accessed 11/5/14; “Governor Election Results,” New York Times, accessed November 5, 2014, at 11:25 p.m. 87 “Governor Election Results,” New York Times, accessed November 5, 2014, at 11:25 p.m.

ATTORNEY GENERAL

Two-term Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen announced in October 2013 that he would not run for re- election.88 Van Hollen, a Republican, spent much of his last term defending a series of controversial laws that Governor Scott Walker signed into law.89 Republican Waukesha District Attorney Brad Schimel and Democratic Jefferson County District Attorney Susan Happ won their respective primaries to replace Van Hollen.90

Given the attorney general office’s involvement in defending several controversial, recently-passed pieces of legislation, the race was contentious. While Happ has said she would not defend the state’s voter ID law in court, Schimel has emphasized the importance of defending such laws that the state has passed. Schimel even said that he would not have defended a ban on interracial marriage had he been the state’s attorney general in the 1950’s because, “as the state's lawyer, it's not my job to pick and choose.”91 Schimel, however, did not promise to defend the state’s campaign finance laws that are at the center of an ongoing investigation into Governor Walker’s 2010 campaign.92

Schimel ran as a staunch ally of Governor Walker. He attracted controversy for comments he made at a Milwaukee County Republicans event where he implied that fast food workers should “get a real job” and endorsed a pro-life interest group’s plan to make abortion illegal in nearly all cases.93 In light of Schimel’s anti-choice background, Happ worked to position herself as the staunch supporter of choice and other women’s health issues.94

Although the most important issues in the race were clearly tied to Governor Walker’s polarizing first term, the high-profile governor’s race overshadowed Happ and Schimel. According to a mid-October Marquette University Law School poll, nearly three in four likely voters said they didn't know enough about the candidates to say whether they had a favorable or unfavorable opinion of them.95 In that poll, Happ and Schimel were tied at 42%.96 Happ led 40-33 in another Marquette University Law School poll from late August.97

88 Patrick Marley, “J.B. Van Hollen won't seek third term as attorney general, “ Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, October 7, 2013. 89 Patrick Marley, “J.B. Van Hollen won't seek third term as attorney general,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, October 7, 2013. 90 Patrick Marley, “Democrat Happ wins attorney general primary,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, August 12, 2014. 91 Patrick Marley, “Democrats hit candidate Schimel for statement on interracial marriage,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, October 8, 2014. 92 Patrick Marley, “Susan Happ, Brad Schimel clash on when to defend state laws,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, October 12, 2014. 93 Alice Ollstein, “Attorney General Candidate Says Fast Food Workers Should Get ‘A Real Job’,” ThinkProgress, October 20, 2014; Patrick Marley, “Democrats blast Schimel for signing onto anti-abortion legal paper,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, October 24, 2014. 94 Patrick Marley, “AG candidates Happ, Schimel spar over campaign finance regulations,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, October 24, 2014. 95 Patrick Marley, “Majority of voters know little about Brad Schimel, Susan Happ,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, October 15, 2014. 96 “Marquette Law School Poll – October 9-12, 2014 Results for Registered Voters,” Marquette University Law School, 803 likely voters, MoE ±3.5%, October 9–12, 2014. 97 “Marquette Law School Poll – August 21-23, 2014 Results for Registered Voters,” Marquette University Law School, 609 likely voters, MoE ±4.1%, August 21–24, 2014.

Wisconsin Attorney General 2014 Public Polling98

Wisconsin Attorney General Polling Accuracy Pollster Dates Sample Happ % Schimel % Marquette University Law School 10/23-10-26 1,164 LVs 39% 43% Marquette University Law School 10/9-10/12 803 LVs 42% 42% Marquette University Law School 9/11-9/14 589 LVs 41% 42% Marquette University Law School 8/21-8/24 609 LVs 43% 32% Average N/A N/A 41% 39% Final Results N/A N/A 45.4% 51.6% Difference N/A N/A 4.4% 12.6% Source: “Results and Data,” Marquette University Law School Poll, accessed November 6, 2014.

Wisconsin Attorney General 2014 Results Registered Total Schimel Other Happ Votes Happ % Schimel % Other % Voters Voters Votes Votes 3,391,118 2,336,805 1,060,425 45.4% 1,205,165 51.6% 71,215 3.0% Sources: “Wisconsin: AP Election Results,” Associated Press, accessed November 5, 2014, at 12:31 p.m.; “November 1, 2014 Voter Registration Statistics,” Government Accountability Board, November 1, 2014.

98 Atlas Online Toolkit, Charts module, accessed 11/6/14.

Happ first went on the air during her primary against state Assemblymember Jon Richards and Dane County district attorney Ismael Ozanne; she ran just over an estimated $180,000 in ads.99 During her general election against Schimel, outside groups ran all of ads on her behalf. The Committee For Justice and Fairness—a union- and trial lawyer-backed PAC—aired its first ad for Happ on October 21st. Happ also benefited from the Greater Wisconsin Political Fund, which aired a negative ad against Schimel that aired in the Green Bay and Milwaukee markets starting on October 21st100

Schimel’s first ads aired on October 9th. He also received considerable assistance from the WMC Issues Mobilization Council, an affiliate of Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce that aired an estimated $1.5 million worth of ads on his behalf.101 The group aired a positive ad about Schimel’s career as Waukesha County District Attorney on October 15th and also paid for a separate spot that ran in the last week of October that attacked Happ over an alleged connection to convicted child molesters.102

Overall, conservatives outspent progressives by a wide margin in this race. Over the course of the general election, the Greater Wisconsin Political Fund and the Committee for Justice and Fairness combined for just 1,273 spots worth $686,000 on broadcast media.103 Schimel’s campaign and conservative groups more than doubled them on both measures. His campaign and outside groups combined for 2,845 spots worth $1.8 million.104

99 CMAG data, accessed November 6, 2014. Copyright 2014 by Kantar Media Intelligence. All rights reserved. 100 CMAG data, accessed November 6, 2014. Copyright 2014 by Kantar Media Intelligence. All rights reserved. 101 CMAG data, accessed November 6, 2014. Copyright 2014 by Kantar Media Intelligence. All rights reserved. 102 CMAG data, accessed October 26, 2014. Copyright 2014 by Kantar Media Intelligence. All rights reserved. 103 CMAG data, accessed November 6, 2014. Copyright 2014 by Kantar Media Intelligence. All rights reserved. 104 CMAG data, accessed November 6, 2014. Copyright 2014 by Kantar Media Intelligence. All rights reserved.

Wisconsin Attorney General Broadcast-Media Spot Count, August 13-November 4, 2014

Conservative

Progressive

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000

Wisconsin Attorney General Estimated Broadcast-Media Spending, August 13-November 4, 2014

Conservative

Progressive

$0 $500,000 $1,000,000 $1,500,000 $2,000,000

MESSAGING

Schimel’s first ad touts his “decorated” record as Waukesha County District Attorney. It highlights his endorsements from state law enforcement leaders and brands him as “law enforcement’s choice for Attorney General.” 105 Happ’s introductory ad that aired during her August primary struck a similar tone and focused on her record as a county district attorney while she introduced herself to voters on a Harley Davidson motorcycle. Meanwhile, the union-backed Committee for Justice and Fairness attacked Schimel for failing to prosecute sex abuse cases involving child pornography and other sexual abuse crimes.106 Another outside group—the Greater Wisconsin Political Fund—also launched a negative ad against Schimel in late October that criticized his position on women’s issues like abortion and mentioned a statement he made that suggested he would defend a law against interracial marriage.107

In the closing days of the campaign, Schimel aired an ad that attacked Happ’s defense of a convicted child molester while she was a defense lawyer prior to her election as a county district attorney. The ad also accused her of profiting off of a land deal with another man who was accused of molesting children.108 The WMC Issues Mobilization Council also aired a spot about the former allegations in ad that debuted in the Milwaukee market on October 25th.109 Madison’s CBS affiliate fact-checked both ads and found that they contained multiple claims that “needed clarification.”110

Top Issues in Partisan Messaging Issue Democrat Republican Total Social Issues 47% 24% 37% Health Care 9% 5% 7% Guns 8% 0% 5% Energy/Environment 0% 5% 2% Other 36% 66% 48% Source: CMAG data, accessed November 6, 2014. Copyright 2014 by Kantar Media Intelligence. All rights reserved.

The above chart reflects the top issues that came up in both Democrats’ and Republicans’ broadcast media advertisements. Included in the “other” category are ads that deal with public safety and domestic abuse in this race for Wisconsin’s top law enforcement officer.

GEOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS The geographic breakdown of the Attorney General’s race was similar to the gubernatorial election at the top of the ticket. Happ handily won Milwaukee and Dane Counties, which had more total votes than any other two counties in the state, but she lost almost everywhere else. Happ, the Jefferson County District Attorney, did not even win her home county, which is a collection of distant suburbs and small towns located in between Milwaukee and Madison.111 Statewide, she ran about one point behind Burke and their margins at the county level tracked each other closely.

105 CMAG data, accessed October 26, 2014. Copyright 2014 by Kantar Media Intelligence. All rights reserved. 106 “About Us,” Committee for Justice and Fairness PAC, accessed October 22, 2014. 107 CMAG data, accessed October 26, 2014. Copyright 2014 by Kantar Media Intelligence. All rights reserved. 108 CMAG data, accessed November 4, 2014. Copyright 2014 by Kantar Media Intelligence. All rights reserved. 109 CMAG data, accessed November 4, 2014. Copyright 2014 by Kantar Media Intelligence. All rights reserved. 110 Jessica Arp, “Reality Check: Ads attack Happ's handling of cases,” WISC-TV, October 29, 2014. 111 “Wisconsin: AP Election Results,” Associated Press, accessed November 5, 2014, at 11:30 p.m.

Democrats running for Attorney General should follow the same plan as any other Democratic candidate running statewide. They should aim to win well over 60% of the vote in Dane and Milwaukee—the state’s two most populous counties that contain a sizeable portion of the state’s Democratic base. At the same time, a successful Democratic candidate for Attorney General would stay competitive in the closely divided regions of the state like the Fox Valley, which includes the mid-sized cities of Appleton and Green Bay. Democrats also cannot afford to get blown out in populous GOP strongholds like Waukesha County where this year, Republicans posted a net gain of nearly 100,000 votes in the Attorney General’s race.112

As Happ badly lost Waukesha, her losing margin there was not sufficiently offset by her winning margins in Milwaukee and Dane. In these two counties, she won 61.3% and 67.3%, respectfully. While both counties are more populous than Waukesha, Happ lost the lion’s share of the state’s rural counties, including some in the largely Democratic Southwestern corner of the state.113 From President Obama’s two victories in the state to Senator Tammy Baldwin’s election in 2012, most successful statewide Democrats hold their own in many of the counties that are shades of dark red in the map below.114

Happ 2014 Performance by County

112 “Wisconsin: AP Election Results,” Associated Press, accessed November 8, 2014, at 3:09 p.m. 113 “Wisconsin: AP Election Results,” Associated Press, accessed November 8, 2014, at 3:09 p.m. 114 Atlas Online Toolkit, Election Results module, accessed 11/7/14.

STATE LEGISLATURE

Republicans took control of both chambers of the Wisconsin state legislature in 2010, and Democrats briefly retook the state Senate after the 2012 recall election. After the 2012 general election, however, Republicans netted two pickups, which gave them an 18-15 majority in the upper chamber. While Democrats targeted several open seats to once again retake control of the Senate, the state House of Representatives was never in danger of flipping.

STATE SENATE Control of the Wisconsin state Senate has frequently changed in recent years. Between the 2006 and 2010 elections, Democrats controlled the Senate, but Republicans picked up five seats in 2010 and took control of the chamber for the first time since 2004. Then, in the high-profile recall elections that took place in 2011 and 2012, Democrats defeated two Republican senators to retake control of the chamber. In the 2012 general election, however, the pendulum swung back to Republicans as the party won two Democratic-controlled seats.

After the 2012 election, Republicans held a 18-15 majority in the state Senate. After Republicans took control of state government, GOP leaders passed a controversial redistricting plan that reduced the number of competitive seats in the chamber.115 Because of a relatively large number of retirements, however, Democrats still hoped to retake control.

Seven of Wisconsin’s 33 senators that were up for re-election retired. One of these districts includes Republican Dale Schultz’s 17th District, which President Obama won in 2012 with 56.6% of the vote.116 Schultz, a moderate Republican, was the only member of his caucus to vote against Act 10, which was Governor Walker’s controversial assault on collective bargaining that the media referred to as the “budget repair bill.”117 Although he voted for the state’s controversial voter ID requirement, he eventually became a critic of the law’s restrictive consequences and he also developed a moderate reputation on other issues like mining.118 Schultz retired after state Representative Howard Marklein, who supported Act 10, announced that he would challenge Schultz in the Republican primary.119

In addition to the 17th District, Democratic Senator John Lehmann vacated the Republican-leaning SD-21 that gave Mitt Romney 54.8% of the vote in 2012 to run for lieutenant governor. Four of the retiring senators hold seats that their party comfortably carried in the 2012 presidential election, while a third district that retiring state Senate President Michael Ellis held is about evenly split between Democrats and Republicans in Presidential races. In 2012, President Obama won the district by just 12 votes.120 Democrats also targeted incumbent Senator Frank Lassee and accused the Senator of not living within the SD-01’s boundaries.121

115 Craig Gilbert, “The loss of competition in the GOP's Wisconsin redistricting plan,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, July 13, 2011. 116 “Daily Kos Elections' statewide election results by congressional and legislative districts,” Daily Kos Elections, accessed October 1, 2014. 117 Nick Penzenstadler, “Wave of moderate retirements could push Wisconsin more partisan,” Green Bay Press Gazette, February 4, 2014. 118 Jack Craver, “The last moderate: Will ‘passionate pragmatist’ Dale Schultz be driven out of the Wisconsin Senate?”, The Capital Times, August 7, 2013; Jack Craver, “Dale Schultz: 'I am not willing to defend them anymore',” The Capital Times, March 18, 2014. 119 Dee Hall, The Capital Times, “Rep. Howard Marklein to challenge Sen. Dale Schultz,” Wisconsin State Journal, April 9, 2013. 120 “Daily Kos Elections' statewide election results by congressional and legislative districts,” Daily Kos Elections, accessed October 1, 2014. 121 Adam Rodwald, “Democrats accuse Lasee of living outside district,” Green Bay Press Gazette, June 7, 2014.

Ultimately, Republicans held all of the districts that Democrats targeted. They will head into the next legislative session with a 19-14 majority, which matches the number of seats that the party held after the 2010 election.122 None of the aforementioned seats that Democrats hoped to flip were close. Despite voting for Obama in 2012 by a substantial margin, state Representative Republican Howard Marklein easily won the largely rural 17th District in Southwestern Wisconsin seat with 55% of the vote.123 In the Fox Valley-based 19th District, Senate President Michael Ellis’s open seat was just as much of a disappointment as Democratic state Representative Penny Bernard Schaber lost to former Republican state Representative Roger Roth by fifteen points.124 Finally, Republican Van Wanggaard also easily picked up Democratic state Senator John Lehman’s Racine-based 21st District, which was made significantly more Republican in redistricting.125

Historical Partisanship of Wisconsin State Senate126

20 18 18 19 19 18 16 14 14 14 15 15 12 10 Dem GOP

Seats 8 6 4 2 0 2008 2010 2012 2014

STATE ASSEMBLY Wisconsin Republicans had a 60-38 seat lead in the Assembly heading into the 2014 election.127 The state has very few competitive Assembly districts, and the chamber was not in danger of flipping.128 After election night, Republicans defeated two incumbent Democratic representatives and, as of Friday November 7th, were ahead in two uncalled races: Assembly District 85 and Assembly District 51, each by less than 100 votes.129 If their margins hold, Republicans will have a 63-36 majority in the state legislature.130The chart below assumes that Republicans will pickup both of these uncalled districts.

122 “2011 State and Legislative Partisan Composition,” National Conference of State Legislatures, January 31, 2011. 123 “Wisconsin: AP Election Results,” Associated Press, accessed November 5, 2014, at 12:31 p.m. 124 “Wisconsin: AP Election Results,” Associated Press, accessed November 5, 2014, at 12:31 p.m. 125 Craig Gilbert, “The loss of competition in the GOP's Wisconsin redistricting plan,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, July 13, 2011. 126 “State Partisan Composition,” National Conference of State Legislators, June 13, 2014; “2014 Post Election Governors & Legislative Partisan Splits,” Stateside Associates, accessed November 5, 2014 at 9:16 p.m. 127 Patrick Marley, “Assembly leader Robin Vos outlines Wisconsin GOP legislative agenda,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, October 21, 2014. 128 Craig Gilbert, “The loss of competition in the GOP's Wisconsin redistricting plan,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, July 13, 2011. 129 Patrick Marley, “GOP increases its majorities in Wisconsin Legislature,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, November 5, 2014. 130 “2014 Post Election Governors & Legislative Partisan Splits,” Stateside Associates, accessed November 5, 2014, at 9:16 p.m.; “Wisconsin: AP Election Results,” Associated Press, accessed November 7, 2014.

Historical Partisanship of Wisconsin State Assembly131

60 63 52 60 60 50 46 38 39 40 36 Dem 30 GOP Seats

0 2008 2010 2012 2014

CONSEQUENCES Republicans head into 2015 in complete control of state government. While the party’s gains in the already-Republican-dominated state Assembly are immaterial, the results from the competitive state Senate races will make it easier for Governor Scott Walker to pass his right-wing agenda. In addition to picking up the 21st District, Republicans replaced Senator Dale Schultz, a moderate who voted against many of Governor Walker’s initiatives, with a more conservative current state representative. Because Schultz frequently voted against his own party, Democrats will have to account for his loss in future efforts to oppose Walker’s agenda.

Prior to the election, Assembly Speaker Robin Vos outlined some of his caucus’ policy priorities for next year, which include two ideas championed by Governor Walker—an extended tuition freeze at the University of Wisconsin and legislation that would screen people on public benefits for drugs.132 After Assembly Republicans expanded their majority, Vos indicated that the chamber might take up so-called “Right to Work” legislation, a sweeping tax cut proposal, and a “a major expansion of school choice.”133 With an expanded majority in the state Senate that no longer includes a maverick like Dale Schultz, these radical priorities could realistically pass.

131 “State Partisan Composition,” National Conference of State Legislators, June 13, 2014; “2014 Post Election Governors & Legislative Partisan Splits,” Stateside Associates, accessed November 5, 2014 at 9:16 p.m.; “Wisconsin: AP Election Results,” Associated Press, accessed November 7, 2014. 132 Patrick Marley, “Assembly leader Robin Vos outlines Wisconsin GOP legislative agenda,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, October 21, 2014. 133 Tom Kertscher, “State GOP agenda: More tax cuts, school choice, welfare reform and election reform, Assembly Speaker Robin Vos pledges,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, November 5, 2014.