Turnout in Wisconsin’s Supreme Court race was remarkable for an off-year election

CNN - Apr 2nd, 2025

In a significant victory, liberal candidate Susan Crawford triumphed over conservative Brad Schimel in the Wisconsin State Supreme Court race, maintaining a liberal majority on the court. The election drew national attention as a proxy battle between Democrats and Republicans, with substantial financial backing from figures like Elon Musk for Schimel. Crawford secured 55% of the vote, winning in counties that previously supported Trump, signaling a shift in voter dynamics. The turnout was notably high for an off-year election, with over 2.3 million votes cast, highlighting continued voter engagement.

The implications of Crawford's victory extend beyond Wisconsin's borders, as the court is set to deliberate on pivotal issues such as the state's adherence to an 1849 abortion law and the redrawing of congressional maps. The election also serves as a gauge of public opinion on Trump-era policies and Musk's political influence. The liberal win in traditionally conservative areas, particularly in Milwaukee, indicates a potential trend of Democrats outperforming in lower turnout elections. This result provides hope for Democrats aiming to counteract Republican dominance in key regions, while also demonstrating the complex and evolving landscape of American politics.

Donald Trump Elon Musk Voter Turnout Susan Crawford Brad Schimel 2023 Election Congressional Maps Wisconsin State Supreme Court Liberal Majority Abortion Law

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

6.0

Moderately Fair

Read with skepticism

The article provides a timely and relevant overview of the Wisconsin Supreme Court race, highlighting its significance in the broader political landscape. It effectively conveys key outcomes and voter turnout statistics, offering insights into shifting political dynamics. However, the lack of explicit source citations and limited transparency regarding the basis of certain claims detracts from its overall credibility. While the story is clear and engaging, it would benefit from a more balanced representation of perspectives and greater source attribution to enhance reliability and reader trust.

Accuracy

The story appears largely accurate, with specific turnout figures and election results aligning with known data. For instance, the turnout of over 2.3 million voters in the Wisconsin Supreme Court race is consistent with reported figures. However, some claims, such as the involvement of national figures like Elon Musk and Donald Trump, require further verification to confirm the extent of their influence and financial contributions. Additionally, the story mentions specific counties that switched political allegiance, which would benefit from cross-referencing with official election data to ensure precision.

Balance

The article presents both liberal and conservative perspectives, highlighting Susan Crawford's victory and Brad Schimel's support from national figures. However, the narrative seems to lean slightly towards the liberal perspective by emphasizing Crawford's win and the counties she flipped. It mentions the involvement of Elon Musk and Donald Trump but does not equally explore the motivations or reactions from the conservative side, potentially leading to an imbalance in representation.

Clarity

The article is generally clear and well-structured, with a logical flow that guides the reader through the election's significance, results, and implications. It uses straightforward language, making the content accessible to a general audience. The narrative effectively highlights key points, such as voter turnout and county-level results, without overwhelming the reader with excessive detail.

Source quality

The article lacks explicit citations or references to authoritative sources, which affects its credibility. While it discusses significant political figures and election outcomes, the absence of direct quotes or data from election officials, political analysts, or other credible sources weakens the overall reliability. The story would benefit from attributing claims to specific sources to enhance trustworthiness.

Transparency

The article does not provide much context about the methodology behind its claims or any potential conflicts of interest. There is limited explanation of how data was obtained or the basis for certain assertions, such as the financial contributions of Elon Musk. Greater transparency regarding the sources of information and any affiliations of the writers would improve the article's transparency.