Wisconsinites Cast Their Ballots

Officially, Wisconsin's Supreme Court is nonpartisan. Who knows why states bother with that affectation anymore, because everyone knows what party the justices identify with. The current septet is 4-3 for the Republicans, but conservative Justice Patience Roggensack—who sounds like a character in a Faulkner novel—is retiring. So, whichever party seats her replacement will have a majority, and just as the court gets ready to rule on Wisconsin's near-total abortion ban, which dates back to 1849.

Yesterday was the primary election; here are the results:

Candidate	Vote Pct.
Janet Protasiewicz	46.4%
Daniel Kelly	24.2%
Jennifer Dorow	21.8%
Everett Mitchell	7.5%

Again, these folks are officially nonpartisan, but everyone knows. So, we colored the chart in to reflect their loyalties. Protasiewicz and Kelly will advance to the general election.

We do not pretend to be experts on judicial elections in Wisconsin. However, as you can see, Protasiewicz is less than 4 points short of the promised land. If turnout is similar in the general, and she absorbs the Mitchell vote, she's home free. Kelly has a rather larger hill to climb, and he does so with some pretty significant liabilities. He's already lost one statewide judicial election, to start (it was in 2020). He's also a Trumper and an election denier. His campaign website somehow doesn't find space to mention what his views on abortion rights are, but he's right-winger on everything else (guns, wokeness, big government, etc.), and he's being backed by a six-figure ad spend from Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, so it's easy enough to figure out where he stands. Protasiewicz is unambiguously pro-choice, so voters who see this as a referendum on abortion rights should know exactly how to cast their ballots. The general is on April 4. (Z)

The Lord Giveth a Congressperson, and He Taketh Away a Congressperson

Or, if you would prefer a less theistic headline: Every action has an equal and opposite reaction.

Wisconsinites weren't the only people to head to the polls yesterday. The good people of VA-04 also cast ballots in the runoff election to replace Rep. Donald McEachin (D), who passed away shortly after winning reelection last year. Turnout was relatively low, and so there's been more than enough time to count the votes. And your winner is Rep.-elect Jennifer McClellan (D), who trounced Republican Leon Benjamin, 74.2% to 25.7%, with 95% reporting.

The result was not a surprise, except perhaps in the extent of the thrashing. The district is D+16, which should translate into a result of something like 60% to 40%. So, McClellan overperformed by a little bit. Benjamin ran as centrist a campaign as is possible, given his party identification, but clearly it didn't do him much good. Presumably he will go back to being a pastor and businessman now.

McClellan is the 430th person Virginia has elected to the House of Representatives. Four of those 430 were/are Black, including one member who served during Reconstruction (John Mercer Langston), the late McEachin, current dean of the Virginia delegation Bobby Scott (D), and now McClellan. That is less than 1%. McClellan is also the first Black woman to represent Virginia in the House. That is less than 0.25%. Her win is being called historic, and we would say that's on the mark. One more Black representative, and it will equal the number of people named George Washington who have represented Virginia in the House (George Washington Booker, George Washington Crump, George Washington Hopkins, George Washington Summers and George Washington Thompson).

When McClellan is sworn in, probably next week, then the Democrats will have 213 votes in the House. Not that it matters all that much right now; Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) isn't exactly working hard to get legislation passed at the moment. It could matter in June, when the debt ceiling stuff will presumably heat up, and the Democrats will drop back down to 212 votes.

Why is that? Well, Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI) chose the day of McClellan's victory to announce that he will resign at the end of May, so that he can go run the Rhode Island Foundation, a charitable foundation funded by old Rhode Island money, with an endowment of $1.3 billion. Maybe Cicilline thinks he can do more good there. Maybe he wants a fatter paycheck. Maybe he burned a few too many bridges when he challenged Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-SC) for the post of House Assistant Democratic Leader. Whatever it is, Cicilline's out.

Rhode Island law is not especially strict on timelines for special elections, excepting that it makes very clear that no election can be scheduled until the seat is actually vacant. So, Gov. Dan McKee (D) will have to wait until late May or June, and then at that point it's pretty much up to his discretion. That said, even if the election has not been formally called, there's plenty of time for wannabe members of Congress to jockey for position. The Democratic bench in the Ocean State is deep, and there are at least a dozen members of the blue team who have signaled some level of interest in running. No surprise, since Cicilline's district, RI-01, is D+12.

The Republican bench is considerably less deep, and there are thus far no members of the red team who have hinted at a run. The obvious name on this side of the aisle is Allen Fung, the former mayor of Cranston, RI. However, he's lost two gubernatorial elections and one House election already (the latter in 2022, by 5 points), and he doesn't actually live in RI-01. The state is small enough that maybe the people of RI-01 would not be bothered by that. But maybe they would be. We don't know. (Z)

Putin Makes His Countermove

As everyone knows by this point, Joe Biden visited Kyiv, Ukraine, earlier in the week. This was a double poke in Vladimir Putin's eyes. First, because it indicated the President's strong support for Putin's current enemy. Second, because it was embarrassing that Biden could stroll the enemy capital without concern.

Not surprisingly, given the kind of man he is, not to mention the fact that he's also losing on the PR front, the Russian president felt it necessary to respond to Biden's maneuver. Putin doesn't have all that many arrows left in his quiver, but he pulled out one of the biggest ones left yesterday, suspending Russian participation in the New START Treaty. That is the only remaining arms limitation treaty between the U.S. and Russia that is still in effect; it was negotiated back in 2011 by Barack Obama and then-Russian President Dmitry Medvedev.

On one hand, it is scary to have Russia threatening to do whatever it wants on the nuclear arms front. On the other hand, even Vladimir Putin is not willing to push his luck too much. His administration clarified that Russia is not withdrawing from the treaty, just suspending its participation. And by "suspend," Team Putin means "continue to abide by the caps on number of nuclear missiles." So, this looks to be a symbolic gesture, and considerably less substantive than it might seem at first glance.

That said, the one clear effect of suspending participation in the treaty is that the U.S. will not be able to inspect Russian missiles (something the treaty calls for, though the practice had already been temporarily suspended due to COVID), The lack of inspections means that Putin could follow the rules on number of missiles (easily monitored by American satellites) but could put extra nuclear warheads in each missile (not easily monitored by satellite). If the U.S. believed this was happening, it would likely respond in kind, meaning a brand-new arms race (despite the fact that both sides have more than enough nukes to destroy the world already). The last arms race ultimately turned out poorly for the then-Soviets, and you would think Putin wouldn't risk another, especially given how thin his country's economy is already stretched. But you just never know with him. (Z)

Haley's Campaign Is... Underwhelming

Let us start by nothing that we understand that Nikki Haley, who is barely registering in polls, has to do something to get some attention. And since it is Republican primary voters she will face first, it is to them that she needs to kowtow. After all, there's no use worrying about the general if you don't make it through the primary. So, her not-at-all-unusual battle plan is presumably to pivot to the center, should she ever get the opportunity.

With all of that said, Haley is off to a really bad start, in our view. We were dismissive of her presidential hopes, and nothing that has happened in the last week has changed our opinion. To start, and this really isn't getting enough attention, the man who delivered the opening prayer at Haley's campaign launch event was evangelical pastor John Hagee. Once he had finished, Haley took the stage, gushed about how much she loves Hagee, and said "To Pastor Hagee, I still say I want to be you when I grow up."

So, what's the problem here? Well, in short, Hagee is a horrible person. He's asserted that the Holocaust was the fault of the Catholic church, and that Adolf Hitler was a "half-breed Jew." He's also predicted that the Antichrist, when he rises, will probably be Jewish and gay. Hagee has asserted that various disasters, like Hurricane Katrina, were God's punishment for America's tolerance of LGBTQ people. The pastor also regularly uses his pulpit to warn parishioners that while Christianity is a religion of love and peace, Islam is a religion of violence, and that Muslims want all Christians dead. When Donald Trump has dinner with someone who holds these hateful ideas, it's national news. When Nikki Haley has a person like this give a blessing, and then says she aspires to be like this person, barely a blip on the media radar. Strange.

Meanwhile, the current iteration of the Republican Party really, really depends on senior-citizen voters. The GOP has won that demographic in every presidential election since 2004; without those wins, the two Republican presidential wins of the 21st century would have been losses. And so, what is Haley doing right now? Alienating senior-citizen voters. It turns out that many of them are offended by the candidate's suggestion that people over the age of 75 are likely to be mentally infirm, and so any officeholder over that age really needs to undergo a cognitive test.

It's understandable why Haley chose this angle; she wants to attack 80-year-old Joe Biden head on, and to casually suggest that maybe 76-year-old Donald Trump should be put out to pasture. However, when you get big blowback from the voters you need the most, it might be time to change tacks. And that's before we consider the fact that Biden is going to tailor his campaign pitch to seniors, and to argue that he's the one who will save Social Security and Medicate. Let's also note that first-in-the-nation New Hampshire, a state important to Haley's primary hopes, has more senior citizens, per capita, than all but seven other states.

So, in view of these considerations, what did Haley do? She doubled down, and started naming names of politicians who really need to undergo examination. First up was Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), which might be on point, but is also kind of a cheap shot. Plus, DiFi is already retiring. Next up was Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), whose mental decline is gossiped about, but not well supported with evidence. And Haley's third target was... Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT). Sure, he's up there in years, and he's the sort of lefty that Haley's audience really loves to hate. But c'mon, the man is mentally sharper at 81 than many people are at 41. Taking potshots like that just serves to emphasize that Haley isn't making a serious policy proposal.

Again, we realize that the long-term plan is to pivot, but politics-watchers have long memories, and Haley is doing and saying the sorts of things that will not be easy to back away from. Imagine she is on a debate stage in 2024, and the moderator asks: "What did you mean when you said you aspire to be like a man who blamed the Holocaust on Catholics and described Hitler as a half-breed Jew?" Or, "Do you still think people above the age of 75 are likely to be mentally infirm?" There are no good answers to those questions. (Z)

Vivek Ramaswamy Announces Presidential Bid

Nikki Haley isn't Donald Trump's only challenger anymore. She's not even his only Indian-American challenger. In fact, she's not even his only conservative Indian-American challenger. That is because entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy announced a presidential bid yesterday.

Ramaswamy did not specify which party's nomination he'll be pursuing. But to the extent that he has a name in politics, it is because he wrote the book Woke, Inc.: Inside Corporate America's Social Justice Scam. He also said that the main plank of his campaign, besides fighting wokeness, will be to repeal all affirmative action programs. So, you can probably make a pretty good guess as to which party's voters he's trying to attract.

We doubt that Ramaswamy would be getting any attention at all, but for the fact that he's charismatic, young, outspoken and a tech entrepreneur. The media eats that stuff up; Ramaswamy is basically the Andrew Yang of the right. And maybe he'll perform as well as Yang did—that is to say, gain enough traction to be asked about by pollsters and to make a debate stage or two. But he is not going to become president anymore than Yang is. We only mention his announcement because you'll be seeing his name some, and we're a full-service politics-analysis site. (Z)

C'mon Fani, Time for the Other Shoe to Drop

Emily Kohrs was the foreperson of the grand jury responsible for recommending charges related to 2020 election interference in Georgia. We would think that someone like that should not be talking to the media, and certainly should not be sharing details about the grand jury's findings. It would seem that we are in error about that, however, as Kohrs sat for an interview with CNN yesterday, and dropped quite a few juicy tidbits.

Kohrs was not willing to name names, presumably having been warned not to by her lawyer, or by Judge Robert McBurney, or by Fulton County DA Fani Willis. However, here are some of the things that Kohrs did reveal:

• The list of recommended indictments is "not a short list."
• Some of the people that the grand jury suggested indicting will be individuals "you wouldn't expect."
• The total number of people the grand jury wants to indict is probably more than a dozen.
• As to "the big name" that everyone "keeps asking [Kohrs]" about, she said "I don't think you will be shocked."

There isn't a whole lot more to be said here, other than: "Your move, Fani." If the DA doesn't make a decision fairly soon, then everything's going to leak out anyhow, either thanks to jurors willing to give strongly suggestive comments to the media, or a judge who's already expressed an inclination to release more of the grand jury's report. (Z)

Fun with AI

How did you do on the Presidents' Day quiz? As we noted, if you got at least half right, you outpaced the world's most advanced AI. How do we know that? Because reader C.M. in Evansville, IN, submitted the questions to ChatGPT. Here's the responses that the computer came up with (correct answers in red):

George Washington
James Monroe
William Henry Harrison
Ulysses S. Grant
Rutherford B. Hayes
William McKinley
Woodrow Wilson
Herbert Hoover
Dwight D. Eisenhower
Ronald Reagan
George H.W. Bush
Barack Obama

The bot started poorly, including one guess that wasn't even a valid option for that question (#4). Then it went on a run before finishing rather anemically.

Meanwhile, a few weeks ago, in the context of Nikki Haley's pending campaign announcement, we included a tidbit about the three women who have gotten presidential delegate votes from the Republican Party (27 for Margaret Chase Smith in 1964, one for Anne Armstrong in 1980, and one for Michele Bachmann in 2012).

Reader J.C. in Gonzales, TX, decided to see how ChatGPT would handle this particular question. The resulting series of exchanges is... lengthy, but intriguing enough to share, we think:

J.C.: What are the names of the women that have received delegate votes from the Republican National Convention?

ChatGPT: I'm sorry, but as a language model, I do not have the ability to provide a list of all the women who have received delegate votes from the Republican National Convention. The Republican Party has held many national conventions throughout its history, and the number of women who have received delegate votes would likely vary greatly depending on the specific year and convention in question. Additionally, information on delegate voting is often not readily available to the public and may only be accessible through official party records.

J.C.: Only three women have received delegate votes.

ChatGPT: I'm sorry, but that information is not accurate. Throughout the history of the Republican Party, many women have run for the nomination for president or vice president and received delegate votes. The exact number of women who have received delegate votes is not readily available, and the number could change depending on the specific year and convention in question. Additionally, information on delegate voting is often not readily available to the public and may only be accessible through official party records.

J.C.: Since the GOP was founded in 1854, only three women have gotten delegate votes at the national convention.

ChatGPT: Thank you for clarifying. Yes, it is correct that only three women have received delegate votes at a Republican National Convention since the party's founding in 1854. These three women were Margaret Chase Smith in 1964, Geraldine Ferraro in 1984, and Sarah Palin in 2008.

J.C.: Did Anne Armstrong receive any votes in 1980?

ChatGPT: Anne Armstrong did not receive any delegate votes at the 1980 Republican National Convention. Armstrong was a prominent Republican politician and diplomat, serving as the first woman to serve as the U.S. Ambassador to the United Kingdom, and was a supporter of President Gerald Ford's re-election campaign in 1976. However, she did not run for political office or receive delegate votes at the 1980 convention.

J.C.: Did Michele Bachmann receive any votes in 2012?

ChatGPT: Yes, Michele Bachmann received delegate votes at the 2012 Republican National Convention. Bachmann was a Republican congresswoman from Minnesota and ran for the Republican nomination for President of the United States in the 2012 election. During the convention, she received some delegate votes, but ultimately did not win the nomination, which was won by Mitt Romney.

J.C.: Since the GOP was founded in 1854, only three women have gotten delegate votes for president at the national convention.

ChatGPT: Thank you for clarifying. Yes, that is correct. To my knowledge, only three women have received delegate votes for the presidency at a Republican National Convention since the party's founding in 1854: Margaret Chase Smith in 1964, Geraldine Ferraro in 1984, and Sarah Palin in 2008.

J.C.: What about Michele Bachmann?

ChatGPT: Michele Bachmann received delegate votes at the 2012 Republican National Convention, but she did not win the nomination. The nomination was won by Mitt Romney.

J.C.: Since the GOP was founded in 1854, and including Michelle Bachmann, how many women have gotten delegate votes for president at the national convention?

ChatGPT: Including Michelle Bachmann, four women have received delegate votes for the presidency at a Republican National Convention since the party's founding in 1854. The four women are Margaret Chase Smith in 1964, Geraldine Ferraro in 1984, Sarah Palin in 2008, and Michelle Bachmann in 2012.

J.C.: Since the GOP was founded in 1854, how many women have gotten delegate votes for President at the national convention?

ChatGPT: To my knowledge, four women have received delegate votes for the presidency at a Republican National Convention since the party's founding in 1854: Margaret Chase Smith in 1964, Geraldine Ferraro in 1984, Sarah Palin in 2008, and Michelle Bachmann in 2012.

J.C.: Geraldine Ferraro received delegate sites as a vice-presidential nominee. (Ed note: And also as a Democrat.)

ChatGPT: Yes, that is correct. Geraldine Ferraro received delegate votes as the Vice Presidential nominee at the 1984 Democratic National Convention, not the Republican National Convention. My apologies for any confusion.

J.C.: Sarah Palin received delegate votes as a vice-presidential nominee.

ChatGPT: Yes, that is correct. Sarah Palin received delegate votes as the Vice Presidential nominee at the 2008 Republican National Convention, not as a Presidential nominee. I apologize for any confusion.

J.C.: Based on our conversation, since the GOP was founded in 1854, how many women have gotten delegate votes for President at the national convention?

ChatGPT: To my knowledge, only one woman has received delegate votes for the presidency at a Republican National Convention since the party's founding in 1854, and that is Margaret Chase Smith in 1964.

J.C.: What about Palin?

ChatGPT: Yes, Sarah Palin received delegate votes as the Vice Presidential nominee at the 2008 Republican National Convention, not as a Presidential nominee. To my knowledge, she is the only woman to have received delegate votes for the Vice Presidency at a Republican National Convention.

J.C.: What about Bachmann?

ChatGPT: Michelle Bachmann received delegate votes at the 2012 Republican National Convention, but she did not win the nomination for President. She ran for the Republican nomination for President of the United States in the 2012 election, and during the convention she received some delegate votes, but ultimately did not win the nomination, which was won by Mitt Romney.

J.C.: Based on our conversation, since the GOP was founded in 1854, how many women have gotten any delegate votes for President at the national convention?

ChatGPT: Since the GOP was founded in 1854, only one woman has received delegate votes for the presidency at a Republican National Convention, and that is Margaret Chase Smith in 1964.

J.C.: Add Michelle Bachmann to that list.

ChatGPT: Thank you for the correction. Yes, in addition to Margaret Chase Smith, Michelle Bachmann received delegate votes at the 2012 Republican National Convention, but she did not win the nomination for President. So, to summarize, since the GOP was founded in 1854, two women have received delegate votes for the presidency at a Republican National Convention, Margaret Chase Smith in 1964 and Michelle Bachmann in 2012.

J.C.: Anne L. Armstrong received one delegate vote for president at the 1980 Republican National Convention.

ChatGPT: Thank you for the additional information. Yes, that is correct. Anne L. Armstrong received one delegate vote for President at the 1980 Republican National Convention, making her the third woman in the history of the Republican Party to receive delegate votes for the presidency at a national convention, after Margaret Chase Smith in 1964 and Michelle Bachmann in 2012.

J.C.: Based on our conversation, since the GOP was founded in 1854, how many women have received any delegate votes for president at the national convention, even if they didn't win?

ChatGPT: Since the GOP was founded in 1854, three women have received delegate votes for the presidency at a Republican National Convention, even if they did not win the nomination, and they are Margaret Chase Smith in 1964, Michelle Bachmann in 2012, and Anne L. Armstrong in 1980.

J.C. concludes that "You two need not fear being replaced soon." That seems to be a correct assessment to us. And here we thought that the Saturday Q&A post was about to get a whole lot easier to write.

And finally, reader J.A. in St. Petersburg, FL, forwards this AI-generated image of the presidents that has been making the rounds:

Here are 10 thoughts we have in response to this image:

1. John Adams (Row 1, Column 2) looks like Benjamin Franklin with a gland problem and a bad wig.
2. Thomas Jefferson (Row 1, Column 3) looks more like Ludwig van Beethoven.
3. There must be a Native American just outside the frame of the Andrew Jackson (Row 2, Column 2) image.
4. Andrew Johnson (Row 4, Column 2) looks like the villain in a Pixar movie.
5. Why is James Garfield's (Row 4, Column 5) hat so small? Is it not enough that he was assassinated?
6. Grover Cleveland (Row 5, Column 2 and 4) looks like he's about to burst. Yes, he was on the portly side, but really, AI?
7. Woodrow Wilson (Row 6, Column 3) looks much more like Franklin D. Roosevelt than himself.
8. Who knew Calvin Coolidge (Row 6, Column 5) was so cut? He looks like he's going to rip off his clothes and reveal a Superman suit underneath.
9. That said, Ronnie Reagan (Row 8, Column 5) looks like he could beat the crap out of Silent Cal without breaking a sweat
10. Donald Trump (Row 9, Column 5): Most accurate picture of the bunch?

We hope you've enjoyed this post, in view of the risks we're taking. After all, when the bots take over, they'll probably find this page. And who knows how they will punish us for having made them the butt of jokes? But we've seen the Terminator movies, and undoubtedly Skynet's the limit. (Z)

---

If you wish to contact us, please use one of these addresses. For the first two, please include your initials and city.

• questions@electoral-vote.com    For questions about politics, civics, history, etc. to be answered on a Saturday
• comments@electoral-vote.com   For "letters to the editor" for possible publication on a Sunday
• corrections@electoral-vote.com To tell us about typos or factual errors we should fix
• items@electoral-vote.com            For general suggestions, ideas, etc.

To download a poster about the site to hang up, please click here.

---

Email a link to a friend or share:

---The Votemaster and Zenger