Introduction:
My goal with this post is to preview today’s special election for the open seat in the 10th district of the Wisconsin State Senate by analyzing the results from the December 19 primary. The seat became open when long-time Republican incumbent Sheila Harsdorf was appointed to head the state agriculture department. The primary was on December 19 and was contested on both sides.
Why This Race Matters:
Republicans have a trifecta in the state. The entire assembly is up in November, but Republicans currently hold a 63-35 edge and the median seat in 2016 went for Trump by 9.9 percentage points (even as the presidential margin was .77 percentage points). The governor’s seat is also up in 2018. However, Scott Walker is running for re-election and is currently considered the favorite, although it should be a competitive race.
The state senate is the other possibility. Republicans held a 20-13 edge before this seat came open, so four flips are required. State senators serve four-year terms and elections are staggered, so only half the body is up this year. Table 1 shows the seats that are up in 2018, sorted by 2016 presidential margin.
Table 1
|
Up for Election Wisconsin Senate Seats 2018
|
District
|
Clinton%
|
Trump%
|
Margin
|
Incumbent
|
Next Election
|
3
|
66.1
|
29.1
|
37.0
|
D
|
2018
|
27
|
59.2
|
35.5
|
23.7
|
D
|
2018
|
7
|
58.5
|
35.6
|
22.9
|
D
|
2018
|
15
|
52.7
|
41.5
|
11.2
|
D
|
2018
|
5
|
46.7
|
47.7
|
(1.0)
|
R
|
2018
|
31
|
45.2
|
48.9
|
(3.8)
|
D
|
2018
|
19
|
43.3
|
50.5
|
(7.2)
|
R
|
2018
|
17
|
43.0
|
51.5
|
(8.5)
|
R
|
2018
|
25
|
42.9
|
52.4
|
(9.5)
|
D
|
2018
|
10*
|
38.1*
|
55.3*
|
(17.3)*
|
Open (R)*
|
2020*
|
9
|
38.5
|
55.9
|
(17.5)
|
R
|
2018
|
1
|
38.5
|
56.2
|
(17.7)
|
R
|
2018
|
21
|
38.5
|
56.6
|
(18.0)
|
R
|
2018
|
11
|
37.1
|
57.5
|
(20.4)
|
R
|
2018
|
13
|
37.1
|
57.6
|
(20.6)
|
R
|
2018
|
29
|
37.2
|
58.0
|
(20.8)
|
R
|
2018
|
23
|
36.9
|
57.8
|
(20.9)
|
R
|
2018
|
33
|
34.2
|
60.5
|
(26.3)
|
R
|
2018
|
Assuming successful defense of all Democratic-held seats, the most plausible path to a majority runs through the following four seats: the 5th (-1.02), the 19th (-7.18), the 17th (-8.51), and the 9th (-17.45).
While the first three might be doable in a wave year, the fourth poses a challenge. This is where the 10th comes into play. Flipping a seat with a similar presidential margin (-17.25) is much more plausible in a special election scenario with no incumbent and the potential for unusual turnout dynamics. I would go as far as suggesting that Democratic hopes of flipping the state senate probably hinge on pulling off an upset in this special election.
The District:
The 10th is the westernmost district in the state, lying along the Minnesota border (near Minneapolis) as seen on the map above.
The district consists of five counties: Burnett, Polk, St. Croix, Dunn and Pierce. Table 2 contains some key background information on each county.
Table 2
|
County Background Statistics (2016 Data)
|
Statistic
|
Burnett
|
Polk
|
Dunn
|
Pierce
|
St. Croix
|
Wisconsin
|
Total Population
|
15,213
|
43,481
|
44,704
|
41,238
|
88,029
|
5,778,708
|
White alone (not Hispanic or Latino)
|
90.8%
|
95.1%
|
93.1%
|
94.7%
|
94.2%
|
81.7%
|
Bachelor's degree or higher
|
18.5%
|
19.6%
|
26.6%
|
27.8%
|
33.4%
|
28.4%
|
Persons 65 years and over
|
27.3%
|
19.6%
|
15.6%
|
13.7%
|
13.2%
|
16.1%
|
Population per square mile (2010)
|
18.8
|
48.4
|
51.6
|
71.5
|
116.8
|
105
|
Median household income (2016$)
|
$42,441
|
$52,039
|
$51,787
|
$64,364
|
$73,743
|
$54,610
|
Civilian labor force participation
|
54.2%
|
64.1%
|
66.0%
|
70.8%
|
73.0%
|
66.9%
|
Median gross rent
|
$627
|
$732
|
$728
|
$781
|
$922
|
$789
|
Persons in poverty
|
13.8%
|
9.9%
|
12.5%
|
8.1%
|
5.6%
|
11.8%
|
Persons without health insurance
|
8.8%
|
7.5%
|
6.2%
|
5.4%
|
4.3%
|
6.2%
|
Population change (from 2010)
|
-1.6%
|
-1.6%
|
1.9%
|
0.5%
|
4.4%
|
1.6%
|
There is a clear contrast between St. Croix (bigger, more dense, younger, high educational attainment, strong economic indicators, growing population) and Burnett (the complete opposite on those same measures). Polk, Pierce, and Dunn all fall somewhere in the middle, although the latter two are younger and have much higher levels of educational attainment (and Pierce is a little better off economically). In terms of race, these counties are all very white.
Wisconsin senate districts consists of three assembly districts each (the 28th, 29th, and 30th in this case). Table 3 shows 2016 presidential results by assembly district (courtesy of Daily Kos calculations):
Table 3
|
2016 Presidential Results by Assembly District (Wisconsin SD 10)
|
AD
|
County
|
Total Votes
|
Clinton%
|
Trump%
|
Margin
|
28
|
Burnett (pt.)
|
4,931
|
29.6%
|
66.0%
|
-36.3%
|
|
Polk (pt.)
|
21,205
|
33.6%
|
60.8%
|
-27.2%
|
|
St. Croix (pt.)
|
3,479
|
30.8%
|
62.9%
|
-32.1%
|
Total (28)
|
|
29,615
|
32.6%
|
61.9%
|
-29.3%
|
29
|
Dunn (pt.)
|
11,197
|
46.1%
|
46.0%
|
0.1%
|
|
St. Croix (pt.)
|
17,368
|
33.7%
|
59.2%
|
-25.5%
|
Total (29)
|
|
28,565
|
38.6%
|
54.0%
|
-15.4%
|
30
|
Pierce (pt.)
|
6,905
|
49.1%
|
42.5%
|
6.6%
|
|
St. Croix (pt.)
|
25,734
|
40.7%
|
52.6%
|
-11.8%
|
Total (30)
|
|
32,639
|
42.5%
|
50.4%
|
-7.9%
|
SD 10
|
|
90,819
|
38.0%
|
55.3%
|
-17.3%
|
Burnett and Polk went heavily for Trump (consistent with their profile above), while Pierce and Dunn were slightly Democratic. St. Croix also went for Trump, although the margin was noticeably closer in the portion in the 30th district.
Since I did not break down the primary data by assembly district, I have provided the results solely by county in Table 4 for reference.
Table 4
|
2016 Presidential Results by County (SD 10)
|
County
|
Total
|
Clinton%
|
Trump%
|
Margin
|
Net Votes
|
Burnett (28)
|
4,931
|
29.6%
|
66.0%
|
-36.3%
|
(1,792)
|
Polk (28)
|
21,205
|
33.6%
|
60.8%
|
-27.2%
|
(5,761)
|
St. Croix (30, 29, 28)
|
46,581
|
37.4%
|
55.8%
|
-18.4%
|
(8,586)
|
Dunn (29)
|
11,197
|
46.1%
|
46.0%
|
0.1%
|
16
|
Pierce (30)
|
6,905
|
49.1%
|
42.5%
|
6.6%
|
456
|
Total
|
90,819
|
38.0%
|
55.3%
|
-17.3%
|
(15,667)
|
The ‘Net Votes’ column highlights the importance of St. Croix County, which comprises over half the district. St. Croix went solidly Republican in 2016 and served as the biggest source of net votes for Trump in the district, even outpacing the more conservative Polk. The limited Democratic victories in Dunn and Pierce provided few net votes due to the small amount of total votes from those counties.
However, the 2016 presidential results do not tell the whole story. Table 5A shows the presidential shift from 2012 to 2016 by assembly district.
Table 5A
|
SD 10 Presidential Shift (2012 to 2016)
|
AD
|
Obama%
|
Romney%
|
Margin
|
Clinton%
|
Trump%
|
Margin
|
2016 Margin D Shift
|
28
|
43.7%
|
54.8%
|
-11.1%
|
32.6%
|
61.9%
|
-29.3%
|
-18.2%
|
29
|
48.2%
|
50.1%
|
-1.9%
|
38.6%
|
54.0%
|
-15.4%
|
-13.5%
|
30
|
46.2%
|
52.2%
|
-6.0%
|
42.5%
|
50.4%
|
-7.9%
|
-1.9%
|
SD 10
|
46.0%
|
52.4%
|
-6.4%
|
38.0%
|
55.3%
|
-17.3%
|
-10.9%
|
The district as a whole shifted towards Trump by 11 points. The 28th and the 29th formed most of that swing, as Trump’s vote share actually fell in the 30th. These results suggest there may be persuadable voters in the 30th in particular. We can further draw this out by focusing on raw vote totals and turnout dynamics, as I have done in Table 5B.
Table 5B
|
SD 10 Presidential Raw Vote and Turnout Dynamics (2012 to 2016)
|
District
|
Total Votes
|
Obama-Romney
|
Clinton - Trump
|
Margin Shift
|
Clinton - Obama
|
Trump - Romney
|
Two party total shift
|
Third party shift
|
Total vote shift
|
AD 28
|
29,615
|
-3,260
|
-8,670
|
-5,410
|
-3,171
|
2,239
|
-932
|
1,165
|
233
|
AD 29
|
28,565
|
-537
|
-4,409
|
-3,872
|
-2,716
|
1,156
|
-1,560
|
1,607
|
47
|
AD 30
|
32,639
|
-1,917
|
-2,588
|
-671
|
-903
|
-232
|
-1,135
|
1,820
|
685
|
SD 10
|
90,819
|
-5,714
|
-15,667
|
-9,953
|
-6,790
|
3,163
|
-3,627
|
4,592
|
965
|
Some things to note:
1) Clinton lost votes in all three districts even as the total vote went up in each district.
2) Trump gained votes overall, but his gain was less than half of the votes Clinton lost.
3) There were big increases in all three districts in the third party vote.
4) AD 28 was particularly enthusiastic about Trump
5) AD 29 was particularly unenthusiastic about Clinton (Dunn County was her fifth worst county in the state in the primary)
6) AD 30 was particularly unenthusiastic about Trump
My takeaway for the special election would be that the opportunities for improvement mainly lie in AD 29 and AD 30. The latter features the type of well-educated voters that are trending Democratic, while the former may contain voters who could be brought back into the Democratic fold with the right candidate.
The 2016 Senate race is also illustrative. Ron Johnson outperformed Trump by a margin of 2.6 percentage points across the state, so breaking down that outperformance by county can help indicate what type of Republicans they contain. That data is provided in Table 6 (I should note that this data may not match up perfectly since portions of these counties lie in other senate districts, but the general trend should still be relevant).
Table 6
|
2016 Senate R Outperformance by County
|
County
|
Senate Margin Outperformance
|
Burnett
|
(4.3%)
|
Polk
|
(3.1%)
|
St. Croix
|
2.4%
|
Dunn
|
(2.2%)
|
Pierce
|
(0.2%)
|
Statewide
|
2.6%
|
Burnett, Polk, and Dunn are particularly Trump-friendly, while St. Croix is particularly anti-Trump, which is consistent with the analysis above.
Finally, to incorporate more recent results, I bring in county results from the 2016 statewide (nonpartisan) spring election for Superintendent of Public Instruction. Democratic incumbent (and gubernatorial candidate primary favorite) Tony Evers won easily over a Republican challenger (keeping in mind that the election was officially nonpartisan). Table 7 shows the Democratic shift from that election along with turnout.
Table 7
|
County Shift Towards D (2016 Presidential to 2017 Superintendent of Public Instruction)
|
County
|
Clinton%
|
Trump%
|
2016 Margin
|
Evers (D)%
|
Holtz (R)%
|
2017 Margin
|
Margin Shift
|
% of 2016 Vote
|
Burnett
|
33.7%
|
61.9%
|
-28.2%
|
58.1%
|
41.9%
|
16.1%
|
44.3%
|
30.6%
|
Polk
|
33.3%
|
60.7%
|
-27.5%
|
67.1%
|
32.8%
|
34.3%
|
61.7%
|
33.4%
|
St. Croix
|
36.8%
|
55.2%
|
-18.4%
|
67.2%
|
32.6%
|
34.5%
|
52.9%
|
13.6%
|
Dunn
|
40.9%
|
52.0%
|
-11.1%
|
73.0%
|
27.0%
|
46.0%
|
57.1%
|
19.0%
|
Pierce
|
39.3%
|
52.7%
|
-13.4%
|
70.4%
|
29.6%
|
40.9%
|
54.3%
|
14.7%
|
Statewide
|
46.5%
|
47.2%
|
-0.8%
|
69.80%
|
30.00%
|
39.80%
|
40.60%
|
23.80%
|
The turnout numbers are particularly interesting here, as the two most Trump-friendly counties saw significantly higher turnout relative to the other counties in the district. This turnout dynamic would be highly unfavorable to Democratic candidates.
The Republican Candidates:
Both candidates for the Republican nomination were state assembly members. Adam Jarchow represents the more rural and conservative 28th district and appears to be more of a “Tea Party” Republican. Shannon Zimmerman represents the 30th district and appears to be more of a “business” Republican.
Jarchow’s district included more 2016 Trump voters (18,332) than Zimmerman’s (16,462). However, two-thirds of the Republican votes in the 29th district (represented by neither) come from St. Croix County, where Zimmerman has more presence in his district (13,529) than Jarchow (2,188).
If Jarchow could hold his own in St. Croix County, his natural numbers advantage would give him a slight edge. Zimmerman, in turn, needed to run up the score in St. Croix County by making in-roads into the 29th. The wild card was the turnout dynamics from the 2017 spring election (overrepresentation in the 28th, underrepresentation in the 30th), which would be favorable for Jarchow if they were to repeat.
In terms of fundraising, I have included the relevant numbers in Table 8, however the headline numbers are a bit deceptive. The vast majority of Zimmerman’s funding came from personal loans, and he raised very little from individuals compared to Jarchow.
Table 8
|
Republican Primary Fundraising (July 1 to December 4)
|
Candidate
|
Raised
|
From Individuals
|
Conduit Contributions
|
Personal Loans
|
Adam Jarchow
|
151,261
|
48,863
|
21,635
|
50,000
|
Shannon Zimmerman
|
223,868
|
3,130
|
700
|
184,400
|
Republican Primary:
Here are the results from the Republican primary:
Table 9
|
SD 10 Republican Primary Results
|
County
|
Total Votes
|
Zimmerman%
|
Jarchow%
|
Net Votes
|
% of 2016 R Vote
|
Burnett (28)
|
533
|
29.5%
|
70.5%
|
219
|
16.4%
|
Polk (28)
|
2,180
|
22.5%
|
77.5%
|
1,198
|
16.9%
|
St. Croix (30, 29, 28)
|
3,519
|
53.5%
|
46.5%
|
(249)
|
13.5%
|
Dunn (29)
|
516
|
59.9%
|
40.1%
|
(102)
|
10.0%
|
Pierce (30)
|
436
|
73.4%
|
26.6%
|
(204)
|
14.9%
|
Total
|
7184
|
44.0%
|
56.0%
|
862
|
14.3%
|
While Zimmerman and Jarchow both performed well in the counties exclusive to their assembly districts, Zimmerman could not run up a big enough margin in St. Croix to overcome the Jarchow landslide in Polk.
The turnout numbers indicate that Jarchow did a better job motivating his base than Zimmerman. Turnout in Dunn (the only county not represented by either candidate) was easily the lowest amount the five.
The Democratic Candidates
There were three candidates on the Democratic side- Patty Schachtner, John Calabrese, and Reuben Herfindahl. Schachtner is the St. Croix County medical examiner, Calabrese is a woodworker and campaign finance reformer in Dunn County, and Herfindahl runs an IT service firm in Pierce County.
The fundraising numbers are in Table 10, with Schachtner possessing the advantage.
Table 10
|
Democrat Primary Fundraising (July 1 to December 4)
|
Candidate
|
Raised
|
From Individuals
|
Committees
|
Personal Loans
|
Patty Schachtner
|
13,210
|
5,610
|
7,500
|
100
|
John Calabrese
|
1,156
|
1,156
|
0
|
0
|
Democratic Primary:
The results are in Table 11. I did not break them out separately, but Calabrese finished with 24.7% of the vote (buoyed by 58.2% in Dunn County) and Herfindahl with 4.7%
Table 11
|
SD 10 Democrat Primary Results
|
County
|
Total Votes
|
Other Dems%
|
Schachtner%
|
Net Votes
|
% of 2016 D Vote
|
Burnett (28)
|
247
|
32.0%
|
68.0%
|
89
|
16.9%
|
Polk (28)
|
1,278
|
29.5%
|
70.5%
|
524
|
17.9%
|
St. Croix (30, 29, 28)
|
2,578
|
18.5%
|
81.5%
|
1,622
|
14.8%
|
Dunn (29)
|
867
|
61.9%
|
38.1%
|
(207)
|
16.8%
|
Pierce (30)
|
553
|
27.8%
|
72.2%
|
245
|
16.3%
|
Total
|
5523
|
29.4%
|
70.6%
|
2273
|
16.0%
|
The margin of victory in St. Croix is particularly notable, as Schachtner capitalize from home field advantage. In terms of turnout, however, it was the most underrepresented county compared to 2016. Dunn turnout was not especially low in contrast to the Republican primary.
Implications for the General:
One way to get a sense of what will happen in the general is to compare raw votes by party in the primary (assisted by the fact that Wisconsin has open primaries), which I have done in Table 12. I have also shown the implied shift from 2016 in Table 13.
Table 12
|
Combined Primary Results
|
County
|
Total Votes
|
R%
|
D%
|
Net Votes
|
% of 2016 Vote
|
Burnett (28)
|
786
|
67.8%
|
31.4%
|
(286)
|
15.9%
|
Polk (28)
|
3,477
|
62.7%
|
36.8%
|
(902)
|
16.4%
|
St. Croix (30, 29, 28)
|
6,123
|
57.6%
|
42.1%
|
(946)
|
13.1%
|
Dunn (29)
|
1,396
|
37.1%
|
62.2%
|
351
|
12.5%
|
Pierce (30)
|
990
|
44.0%
|
55.9%
|
117
|
14.3%
|
Total
|
12,772
|
56.3%
|
43.3%
|
(1,666)
|
14.1%
|
Table 13
|
SD 10 Primary Shift from 2016 Presidential
|
County
|
2016 Margin
|
2017 Margin
|
Shift
|
% of 2016 Vote
|
Burnett (28)
|
-36.3%
|
-36.4%
|
0.0%
|
15.9%
|
Polk (28)
|
-27.2%
|
-25.9%
|
1.2%
|
16.4%
|
St. Croix (30, 29, 28)
|
-18.4%
|
-15.4%
|
3.0%
|
13.1%
|
Dunn (29)
|
0.1%
|
25.1%
|
25.0%
|
12.5%
|
Pierce (30)
|
6.6%
|
11.8%
|
5.2%
|
14.3%
|
Total
|
-17.3%
|
-13.0%
|
4.2%
|
14.1%
|
Burnett and Polk (the most Trump-friendly counties and also the ones Jarchow currently represents) barely shifted at all from the presidential election and saw the highest turnout. St. Croix also saw a limited shift coupled with low turnout. Dunn saw a huge margin shift, but had the lowest turnout.
Something important to note is that the Republican primary, featuring two sitting state representatives, was much more competitive on paper than the Democratic primary. If this caused primary turnout to be asymmetrically higher among Republican voters, today’s results may be more favorable for the Democrats than these results suggest. The Dunn County results become especially interesting with this in mind, as it is the only county not represented by either Republican legislator and saw a 25% margin shift, which would be more than enough to swing the district.
Conclusion:
To conclude, the following things probably need to happen to see a Democratic victory this evening:
1) Much better turnout distribution (lower in the 28th, very high in Dunn and Pierce)
2) A bigger swing in Pierce County to help offset Jarchow’s strength in the 28th
3) Win St. Croix County
This last item is the tough one, but it is tough to see a path to victory without it. One positive that can be pointed to is the contrast between Schachtner and Jarchow. As mentioned above, Schachtner is the chief medical examiner in the county and it was her strongest county in the Democratic Primary. On the other hand, Jarchow’s ideological profile is not as well suited to the county. If Schachtner can persuade over some Republican primary voters who went for Zimmerman, victory in the county and the district would certainly be within reach. No matter what happens on Tuesday, the results should improve our understanding of the political dynamics in the state in an immensely important year.