Connect with us

News

US says Russia helping China develop military technologies

Published

on

US says Russia helping China develop military technologies

Unlock the US Election Countdown newsletter for free

The US has warned that Russia is helping China develop submarine, aeronautic and missile technologies in exchange for Beijing’s support for Moscow’s war against Ukraine.

Russia’s deepening sharing of military knowhow in areas such as stealth and surveillance would have a “negative and concerning impact” on the security of the US and its allies, Kurt Campbell, US deputy secretary of state, said on Tuesday.

“These new areas of collaboration between Russia and China are in the areas of design and . . . application. They are significant,” Campbell told reporters during a visit to Brussels to meet EU, Nato and Belgian officials.

Advertisement

The collaboration could have a “very significant impact on Chinese capabilities and deployments in the western Pacific”, he added.

Russia has historically been cautious about co-operating with China on military technology out of concern about giving too much assistance to the development of the large and highly capable forces in its neighbouring country and a desire to protect its intellectual property.

But Campbell said Russian support, provided in exchange for Chinese supplies of items such as parts used to build Russian weapons, was “orchestrated at the highest levels” in Moscow and Beijing.

The co-operation was “not a tactical alliance, this is a fundamental alignment”, he said.

The Chinese embassy to the EU in Brussels did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Campbell’s comments. Beijing has previously denounced accusations it is supporting Russia’s war effort as “biased, slanderous, and provocative”, insisting it has taken a “constructive role” on the war in Ukraine and has not provided lethal weapons to either side.

Advertisement

Alexander Gabuev, director of the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center in Berlin, said Moscow had become more willing to collaborate with Beijing on military technology after its annexation of Crimea in 2014 and the process had accelerated since its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

“Russia realised that China is pumping tens of billions of dollars into defence research and production, annually,” Gabuev said.

“Russia realised that . . . in certain limited areas, where Russia still has superiority, it has a window of opportunity right now to grow into the Chinese market, earn money, and in the best-case scenario, create a joint value chain.”

Russia on Tuesday announced the start of naval exercise that it said would be joined by four Chinese warships © Russian Defense Ministry/AP

Several Russian scientists working in areas related to weapons development have been given long prison sentences in the past decade for allegedly passing state secrets to China.

Last week, Alexander Shiplyuk, a physicist from a renowned Siberian institute working on scientific research related to the development of Russian hypersonic missiles, received a 15-year sentence for treason. Reuters reported that his arrest followed a trip to a conference in China.

Advertisement

However, western sanctions have made Moscow increasingly dependent on China for access to dual-use goods needed to produce weapons for deployment in Ukraine and to refurbish its military-industrial production facilities.

Russian President Vladimir Putin himself confirmed in 2019 that Moscow was helping Beijing develop a missile-defence early-warning system.

China’s new Type 096 nuclear ballistic missile submarine was also developed with support from Russian technology for making its propulsion system more silent, according to US naval researchers.

Until relatively recently, Russia had resisted sharing advanced submarine technology with China. In 2021, the Rubin Central Design Bureau, one of Russia’s key submarine research centres, was hacked in an intrusion that cyber security experts attributed to Chinese actors.

China and Russia have also been deepening military co-operation by holding large joint naval and air exercises.

Advertisement

On Tuesday, Russia announced the start of a week-long naval exercise involving over 400 vessels and submarines in the Pacific and Arctic oceans and the Mediterranean, Caspian and Baltic seas. Four Chinese warships would join the exercise in the Sea of Japan, it said.

Announcing the start of the drills, Putin accused the US of “trying to maintain its global military and political dominance at any cost”.

“Under the pretext of countering the alleged Russian threat and containing the People’s Republic of China, the US and its satellites are increasing their military presence near Russia’s western borders, in the Arctic and in the Asia-Pacific region,” he said.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

News

Undecided Voters Tell Us About Their Biggest Worries

Published

on

Undecided Voters Tell Us About Their Biggest Worries

Donald J. Trump and Kamala Harris are starkly different presidential candidates. So why are so many voters — roughly 1 in 6 — still unsure of their choice?

We asked voters who have not yet made up their minds — 830 of them across five battleground states and Ohio — to name their biggest worries with both candidates.

Here is what they said.

  • Concern about Trump

    “He’s made people comfortable with being racist and set the country back 50 years with racism.”

    Concern about Harris

    Advertisement

    “She’s a liar and it feels like she hasn’t done anything she said she was going to do.”

    Black woman, 50s, Arizona

  • Concern about Trump

    “Don’t like his rhetoric, how he speaks to people.”

    Concern about Harris

    “Incompetent, no experience in foreign policy or running the government; also has no opinions except on abortion.”

    Advertisement

    White woman, 70s, Wisconsin

  • Concern about Trump

    “Too extreme.”

    Concern about Harris

    “I don’t know much about her, but I’m unsure about how prepared she is to be president.”

    Hispanic man, 30s, Arizona

    Advertisement
  • Concern about Trump

    “Having the right to control my own body.”

    Concern about Harris

    “Immigration and inflation.”

    Black woman, 20s, Georgia

  • Concern about Trump

    “Arrogance.”

    Advertisement

    Concern about Harris

    “She’s a woman and not sure if a woman should be running.”

    White woman, 50s, Arizona

  • Concern about Trump

    “Has felonies on his record.”

    Concern about Harris

    Advertisement

    “Don’t know much about her policy.”

    Black man, 50s, Georgia

  • Concern about Trump

    “I don’t trust him.”

    Concern about Harris

    “I don’t trust her.”

    Advertisement

    Black woman, 60s, Georgia

Until President Joe Biden dropped his bid for re-election, a large share of voters were unhappy with their choices for president.

Today, the electorate as a whole is happier, but the uncommitted voters are still not, according to recent polling by The New York Times and Siena College in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Ohio and Wisconsin.

They trust neither former President Donald J. Trump nor Vice President Kamala Harris. They question the candidates’ honesty and ethics.

Advertisement

Based on New York Times/Siena College polls of 4,132 likely voters conducted in September, including 830 undecided or not fully decided voters in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Ohio and Wisconsin.

Respondents who said they didn’t know or who declined to say are not included.

These voters are younger than the electorate overall, less educated and have a lower income. They are much more likely than voters overall to be Black or Latino, and a little more likely to be men.

Some of these voters may just stay home, but a meaningful portion of them will probably vote. And in a close election, they could be the deciding factor.

Advertisement

In trying to understand what is holding them back from committing, we asked voters to tell us in their own words about their worries. Their phrases were telling: “being a bully,” “she’s an idiot.”

In many ways, their words suggest that voters know, and perhaps have become inured to, Donald Trump’s slash-and-burn campaign style and personality.

But with Kamala Harris, who was plunged into the race only in July, their fears are wider ranging — encompassing both character and the issues, like the economy. And for some voters, the historic nature of her candidacy presents not progress but a drawback.

Voters are concerned about one thing when it comes to Trump: his character.

They said he is arrogant or erratic and talks too much. They talked about his age or criminal trials. The words boiled down to concerns about the former president’s personality and honesty.

Advertisement

Even voters who said they were leaning toward Trump mentioned concerns about chaos and dysfunction.

A small but notable share were also concerned, specifically, about his ability to carry out and complete the tasks of president, mentioning his age and mental capacity.

  • Concern about Trump

    “Angered easily.”

    White man, 40s, Michigan

    Advertisement
  • Concern about Trump

    “Being a bully towards other nations.”

    White man, 60s, Georgia

  • Concern about Trump

    “He is erratic, not very well-spoken and lies.”

    Advertisement

    White man, 40s, North Carolina

  • Concern about Trump

    “Him staying off the internet.”

    White man, 30s, Arizona

  • Concern about Trump

    “Being presidential, sense of decorum, way he communicates.”

    Advertisement

    Man, 60s, Michigan

  • Concern about Trump

    “Does not know when to shut up.”

    White man, 20s, North Carolina

    Advertisement
  • Concern about Trump

    “His age.”

    White woman, 20s, Wisconsin

At the same time, even though Trump has crossed all kinds of red lines during his campaign, voters used comparatively mild language in describing their doubts about him. Words like “a bit” and “a little” crept in frequently.

  • Concern about Trump

    “Little power hungry.”

    Advertisement

    White woman, 30s, Arizona

  • Concern about Trump

    “His authoritative tendencies.”

    White man, 30s, North Carolina

    Advertisement
  • Concern about Trump

    “Probably his rhetoric, maybe, and how he presents himself. And the debate was kind of rough.”

    Woman, 40s, Michigan

  • Concern about Trump

    “Bit decisive at times. He doesn’t always say the right things.”

    Advertisement

    White man, 20s, Georgia

  • Concern about Trump

    “I wish he could be a little more presidential.”

    White woman, 70s, Arizona

  • Concern about Trump

    “He might become too emotional when making decisions.”

    Advertisement

    Nonwhite man, 30s, North Carolina

Concerns about Harris are more varied.

For Kamala Harris, voters’ anxieties were broader and more complicated. Although qualms about her personality came up less often than with Trump, trustworthiness and honesty were still big question marks for many voters.

So was her ability to handle the economy. Voters specifically mentioned costs and inflation, a persistent concern among undecided and not fully decided voters over the last few months.

Advertisement
  • Concern about Harris

    “She will make the economy worse than it is.”

    Black man, 20s, Georgia

  • Concern about Harris

    “That she’s like every other politician, that she is not going to actually do anything to help us.”

    Black woman, 30s, Ohio

  • Concern about Harris

    “Bring down the price of groceries and housing.”

    Advertisement

    Black woman, 60s, Georgia

  • Concern about Harris

    “How she would handle the economy.”

    Hispanic woman, 20s, Georgia

  • Concern about Harris

    “Too liberal.”

    Black woman, 50s, Michigan

    Advertisement
  • Concern about Harris

    “Not following through.”

    White woman, 30s, Wisconsin

  • Concern about Harris

    “The people didn’t vote for her; she was appointed. That is not democracy.”

    White man, 60s, Wisconsin

  • Concern about Harris

    “Democrats take the African American vote for granted. Not sure her policies are going to benefit African Americans.”

    Advertisement

    Black man, 30s, North Carolina

They also questioned her abilities and wondered if she was ready for the job. Some voters described her with caustic language, which echoes Trump’s, who called her “mentally disabled” and “mentally impaired.”

Harris has not leaned into the historical nature of her candidacy — she would be the first woman of color to be president. For some of these voters, her background may be a challenge. Some voters used language that was outright sexist.

  • Concern about Harris

    “That she’s not intelligent enough to be president. I think she is an idiot.”

    White man, 70s, Arizona

    Advertisement
  • Concern about Harris

    “I don’t think she’s got it all together.”

    White woman, 70s, Arizona

  • Concern about Harris

    “Overall untrustworthy.”

    Black man, 40s, North Carolina

  • Concern about Harris

    “I don’t know much about her, but I’m unsure about how prepared she is to be president.”

    Advertisement

    Hispanic man, 30s, Arizona

  • Concern about Harris

    “She’s a woman. I’m not sure she can get the job done. People probably won’t listen to her.”

    White woman, 50s, Ohio

  • Concern about Harris

    “She’s a lady.”

    Black woman, 60s, Wisconsin

    Advertisement

Sources and methodology

Selected responses from New York Times/Siena College polls of 4,132 likely voters conducted in September, including 830 undecided or not fully decided voters in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Ohio and Wisconsin.

Undecided and persuadable voters were voters in the survey who either did not pick a presidential candidate after being asked multiple questions about their vote choice or voters who ultimately did pick a candidate but said they were only “probably” but not “definitely” going to support that candidate.

Open-ended responses to the “biggest concern” question were coded into categories using a trained coder and validated with a second reviewer. The primary coder reviewed a sampling of responses and then created an initial coding schema. Categories were adjusted based on size and coherence throughout the process. Where there was disagreement between coders, proposed codes were reviewed, discussed and compared with similar examples in other surveys. To help ensure consistency, responses that exactly matched previous responses in prior surveys were automatically coded to the same category, but were still reviewed for accuracy.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

The retaliatory cycle has Iran and Israel firmly in its grip

Published

on

The retaliatory cycle has Iran and Israel firmly in its grip

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

The writer is author of ‘Command’ and the Substack ‘Comment is Freed’

There is a famous joke about a frog on the banks of the River Jordan. A scorpion asks for a ride across. “Why would I do that?” says the frog. “If you get on my back you will sting me.” The scorpion explains that he, too, would drown. Reassured the frog carries him, until halfway, the scorpion stings the frog. “Why?” cries the frog, “Now we are both doomed.” Because, comes back the reply, “this is the Middle East.”

It is now a year since Hamas triggered this latest cycle of violence. For Israel, the stakes have grown as its focus has shifted from Gaza to Lebanon. Last week, it inflicted a major blow by killing Hizbollah’s leader, Hassan Nasrallah. Nasrallah made his name in 2006 when the Iran-backed paramilitary group fought Israel to a standstill. His success in exposing Israel’s vulnerabilities made him a hero around the Arab world, with Sunni as well as Shia, assuring him an exalted place among Iran’s partners and strengthening his position as the vital powerbroker in Lebanese politics.

Advertisement

Yet Nasrallah got caught in the tensions between his Iranian and Lebanese roles. He was held responsible by many for Lebanon’s chronic economic misery and political instability while Hizbollah’s position as the most prominent member of the Iranian-orchestrated “axis of resistance” took precedence.

After October 7, Hizbollah, still acting as part of the axis, opened up a second front as Israel began its invasion of Gaza. It was comparatively restrained, although engagements were heavy enough to require civilians to evacuate in large numbers on both sides of the border. It did enough to show solidarity with Hamas but not so much as to trigger a wider war. Israel therefore could concentrate on Hamas and leave Hizbollah until later.

As a result, Hizbollah failed to maximise its military impact at a time when Israel was most exposed, while doing enough to ensure that Israel would turn on them once they got the chance. This new stage in the war came with the elimination of much of the top layers of command, beginning with the notorious pager detonations and culminating in the assassination of Nasrallah himself. Now the IDF has embarked on what it has described as a limited ground incursion into southern Lebanon, to destroy as much as possible of Hizbollah’s military infrastructure.

All this put Iran in a quandary as Israel struck blows against its proxies while it stayed on the sidelines. Back in April, Tehran responded to several senior commanders being killed in an attack on its embassy compound in Damascus by sending large numbers of drones and missiles towards Israel. But most either failed to reach their targets or were shot down. Even after more provocations, including the assassination of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh while he was in Tehran, it did nothing.

Hizbollah is supposedly part of Iran’s deterrent threat yet has been methodically dismantled by Israel. Nasrallah’s assassination brought the issue to a head. The recently elected president, Masoud Pezeshkian, aware of the parlous state of Iran’s economy and widespread popular discontent, sought continuing restraint. But he is subordinate to the supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, backed by the powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. For them more restraint was humiliating. And so on Tuesday night, 181 ballistic missiles hurtled towards targets in Israel. Most were caught by air defences, though some got through, including to airfields. After the strike Iran indicated that it wanted no further escalation.

Advertisement

In Israel there was soon talk of the opportunity this creates for a decisive retaliatory attack that could even complete the process of taking apart the whole Iranian axis by going for Iran itself. This has led to speculation about possible targets. If Israel opts for military installations, Iran will be faced with the same dilemma as before — to respond with missiles or take the hit. But Israel has more ambitious options. US President Joe Biden has urged it to avoid nuclear installations but acknowledged that it might attack oil facilities. If it does, Khamenei has promised Iran’s next strikes might target Israel’s energy infrastructure. It could also generate an international oil crisis by closing the Straits of Hormuz.

Nor is Israel in a position to engineer regime change in Tehran. If this happens it will be because of the actions of ordinary Iranians. And while Israel has been able to demonstrate its military superiority, and has severely weakened its regional adversaries, Iran still has a large stock of ballistic missiles. Nor does Israel have unlimited air defence missiles, particularly the long-range Arrow that has played a critical role in thwarting Iran’s previous attacks.

The Lebanese caretaker government, coping with a humanitarian crisis, is desperate for an end to hostilities, but Hizbollah is still firing rockets across the border and inflicting casualties on the IDF as they battle for control of southern Lebanon. Residents cannot get back to their homes. A ceasefire and hostage deal in Gaza remains elusive.

The balance of power within Tehran is not conducive to a full strategic reappraisal. Israel, for its part, may feel that while there are targets to hit, it must carry on striking them. Yet it remains unclear how it intends to turn its military success to its political advantage and agree arrangements that might actually bring some long-term stability to its borders. It is not that it is impossible to imagine how this might be done — but this is still the Middle East.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

In swing-state Wisconsin, new districts threaten the GOP hold on the Legislature

Published

on

In swing-state Wisconsin, new districts threaten the GOP hold on the Legislature

Packers fans Heather Gunnlaugsson, left, and Tim Mahoney, right, dance as the Packer Tailgate Band plays “Roll Out the Barrel” on Sunday, Sept. 29, before the Packers’ game against the Minnesota Vikings in Green Bay, Wis.

Angela Major/Wisconsin Public Radio


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Angela Major/Wisconsin Public Radio

GREEN BAY, Wis. — Smoke from portable grills filled the air with the smell of bratwurst on a recent Sunday in the parking lots that surround Lambeau Field.

People were gathered to watch the Green Bay Packers take on the rival Minnesota Vikings, but in a state and city where football is a staple of the culture, they were also there for the pregame tailgate and the experience of one of Wisconsin’s premier gathering places.

In one of the crowded lots, the Packers Tailgate Band meandered its way through lawn chairs and folding tables full of food. Brass and woodwind instruments carried the tune while a makeshift drum set mounted to a stroller kept the time. When the band played “Roll Out The Barrel,” a Wisconsin polka staple, people got up from their seats and danced.

Advertisement

“It’s probably like the best job I have,” said Tim Kozlovski, the band’s sousaphone player. “It’s just having fun with people and partying with them and getting them in the spirit for the game.”

Kozlovski said the Packers unify people in Wisconsin — he calls it a “good place in your heart.” And in an atmosphere like that, he said there are some things you just don’t talk about, like politics.

“You gotta learn to keep that to yourself when you’re trying to make people happy,” he said.

Not everyone has that luxury in Green Bay, where for the first time in years, Lambeau Field and the surrounding community are part of a fierce campaign that could decide control of the Wisconsin Legislature. A couple of parking lots over, local Democrats are tailgating, hoping to unlock the political power they were granted when the state redrew its political maps and turned this once-safe GOP district competitive.

“I actually enjoy talking about politics,” said Ryan Spaude, the Democratic candidate running to represent this area at the state Capitol in Madison. He’s a local prosecutor. “I enjoy having a respectful dialogue with other folks about politics. I also think we can do better than some of the yahoos that are down there in Madison right now.”

Advertisement
Wisconsin Assembly Candidate Ryan Spaude mingles with voters and other Democrats at a tailgate Sunday, Sept. 29, outside of Lambeau Field.

Wisconsin Assembly Candidate Ryan Spaude mingles with voters and other Democrats at a tailgate Sunday, Sept. 29, outside of Lambeau Field.

Angela Major/Wisconsin Public Radio


hide caption

toggle caption

Angela Major/Wisconsin Public Radio

Advertisement

Spaude is well aware of the divided nature of his district. President Joe Biden would have won this district in 2020—former President Donald Trump would have carried it in 2016. He jokes that this district is as purple as some of the Minnesota Vikings jerseys in the crowd that day.

“Ninety-nine seats in the state Assembly,” Spaude said. “There’s about a dozen that are like mine that could go either way. These seats will determine who gets the majority.”

Wisconsin could swing up and down the ballot

When it comes to races for statewide office, Wisconsin has a well-earned reputation as a swing state. Four of the last six presidential contests have been decided by less than a percentage point.

But in races for the Legislature, it’s been anything but competitive ever since 2011, when Republicans took control of state government and redrew the state’s legislative district lines, cementing their power for years to come.

Advertisement

“There would be a couple competitive seats in the state Assembly every year, but the outcome of them was basically inconsequential,” said John Johnson, a redistricting expert at Marquette University Law School. “There was no chance that majority control of the chamber would change.”

The GOP used its majorities to shift Wisconsin’s politics to the right. When Republican Scott Walker was in the governor’s office, they famously passed laws that weakened unions in a state with deep ties to organized labor.

Even after Democratic Gov. Tony Evers took office, their legislative majorities effectively gave Republicans veto power. As neighboring states expanded Medicaid or legalized marijuana, the GOP was able to block Evers’ plans that would have had Wisconsin join them.

This election, in this 50-50 district, the debate is different. Spaude said the number one issue he hears from voters is about the cost -of -living.

“The second issue is—why can’t you people work together? Just the gridlock you see,” Spaude said.

Advertisement
Wisconsin Assembly candidate Patrick Buckley stands outside Lambeau Field as fans tailgate Sunday, Sept. 29, 2024, in Green Bay, Wis.

Wisconsin Assembly candidate Patrick Buckley stands outside Lambeau Field as fans tailgate Sunday, Sept. 29.

Angela Major/Wisconsin Public Radio


hide caption

toggle caption

Angela Major/Wisconsin Public Radio

Advertisement

Nearby, Patrick Buckley, Spaude’s Republican opponent is also making the rounds. He’s a small business owner and former police officer who currently chairs the board of Brown County, home to Green Bay.

“We get a lot of stuff done at the county,” Buckley said. “I’d like to take what I’ve learned there at the county to the state level. Because I think we need that there.”

Buckley said the new map created an opening for him because this new district had no incumbent. But he insists he hasn’t really thought about how his race could tip the balance in the Legislature. When asked about the top three things he talks about with voters, Buckley has a clear answer.

“Economy, economy, economy,” Buckley said. “A lot of people are hurting out there, and we gotta figure out what we can do as government to give them some sort of relief.”

Advertisement

New voting maps loosen GOP grip

The idea that Wisconsin could be in this position seemed, just a few years ago, almost impossible. Even with Evers in the governor’s office, the Legislature redrew Wisconsin’s maps to make them even more powerful with the help of a then-conservative majority on Wisconsin’s Supreme Court.

But everything changed in 2023 when voters flipped control of the court from conservative to liberal, and the new majority ordered new maps drawn

In an unexpected twist, the Republican-controlled Legislature chose maps that were drawn by Evers, making the political calculation that it was their least-worst option. In a brief speech before their vote, Republican Assembly Speaker Robin Vos said the new maps would be “very competitive,” and the Legislature would be “up for grabs.”

“We will have the ability to decide if we want to go toward the direction of Minnesota and Michigan,” Vos said, referencing two states where Democrats control both the state Legislature and the governor’s office.”Or [if] we want to stay in the direction that we’re heading in Wisconsin, where we have the ability to have a lower tax burden, a lower regulatory touch, and still a historically good economy for Wisconsin. So I’m optimistic.”

Green Bay Packers fan Bud Hearley stands outside a garage turned into a bar in a neighborhood near Lambeau Field on Sunday, Sept. 29, before the Packers’ game against the Minnesota Vikings.

Green Bay Packers fan Bud Hearley stands outside a garage turned into a bar in a neighborhood near Lambeau Field on Sunday, Sept. 29, before the Packers’ game against the Minnesota Vikings.

Angela Major/Wisconsin Public Radio

Advertisement


hide caption

toggle caption

Angela Major/Wisconsin Public Radio

Advertisement

This will be the first test of how that debate plays out in Wisconsin. As with many political issues, the answer could be complicated.

A few blocks away from Lambeau Field, Bud Hearley was watching the game with family and friends from the comfort of a garage turned into a bar. Hearley, who lives in a nearby district, said there are too many extremes in politics, and he’d like to see more compromise.

“I’m looking for a little more give and take on both sides with the issues that they make so extreme,” Hearley said. “There’s not enough middle.”

Hearly doesn’t fit neatly into one box when it comes to the issues. He favors the legalization of marijuana and thinks women should have the right to abortion, with some limits. He’s also a strong supporter of capitalism who is leery of government overreach. And he tends to vote for Republicans.

Back at the tailgating event, Democratic voter Denise Gaumer Hutchison concedes that Democrats may or may not win it all this year, but for the first time in years, she said they’ll at least be able to force Republicans to have a dialog. That was never possible, she said, under the state’s old maps.

Advertisement
Democratic Party of Wisconsin Chairman Ben Walker, left, speaks to Denise Gaumer Hutchison, center, a Democratic voter from Green Bay, outside Lambeau Field on Sunday, Sept. 29.

Democratic Party of Wisconsin Chairman Ben Walker, left, speaks to Denise Gaumer Hutchison, center, a Democratic voter from Green Bay, outside Lambeau Field on Sunday, Sept. 29.

Angela Major/Wisconsin Public Radio


hide caption

toggle caption

Angela Major/Wisconsin Public Radio

Advertisement

“Those maps were not fair to the point that legislators wouldn’t even try,” Gaumer Hutchison said. “They wouldn’t even do doors. They wouldn’t even come talk to people who might be of a different opinion because they didn’t have to. Now they have to.”

It’s not just Lambeau Field’s Assembly seat that’s up for grabs this year. The district next door is so close it would have been won by both Evers, a Democrat, and Republican U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson two years ago. The surrounding Senate district could also flip and give Democrats a chance at winning that chamber in 2026.

Regardless of the outcome, there’s already been a political sea change in Wisconsin, a state where the race for president is seemingly always up for grabs, and now the state Legislature is, too.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending