Campaigns have always been rough. I'm sick of politics of personal destruction.
The recent Wisconsin Supreme Court race reminds me of better days when candidates treated each other with respect and offered positive visions for the future. Yes, there was once a time when candidates could disagree without being disagreeable, as evidenced by two hard-fought races during my career.
In 1966, I ran in the Republican primary against incumbent Louis Romell to represent a rural district in the Wisconsin Assembly. Louis began serving in the Legislature in 1947 but hadn't risen to a leadership position. Wisconsin needed a new generation of conservative leaders who would keep taxes low and protect our rural communities, and I believed I could do better.
Louis may have taken his reelection for granted because he took an extended vacation that summer while I went door to door in Adams, Juneau and Marquette counties. I met thousands of farmers, small business owners, factory workers and retired persons who shared concerns for their families and communities. I listened, honed my message and used their views to set an agenda for when I got to Madison.
Opinion: Here's what you told us about Wisconsin Supreme Court race
I liked Louis and didn't disparage him on the trail or in the press. Instead, hard work and a positive message propelled me to a primary win with 57 percent of the vote and 72 percent in the general election. When the Assembly met in January 1967 with Republicans in charge, I nominated Louis to serve as the house's Sergeant at Arms. We remained friends until he passed in 1987.
I ran against Tony Earl for governor but still considered him a friend
I ran against another friend in 1986 when I challenged Tony Earl for the governorship. Tony and I served together in the Legislature beginning in 1969, a time when Republicans and Democrats fought fiercely for their principles and policies in the Capitol during the day, and then crossed the street to drink beer together at the Park Motor Inn at night. Like me, Tony quickly rose into leadership in his caucus and looked forward to a promising future.
Tony's governorship was plagued by a stagnant economy and difficult budgets. He and the Democrats in charge of the Legislature had raised taxes to fix the state's fiscal woes and that issue became a problem for him when reelection time came around. In contrast, I opposed tax increases and questioned Tony's plan to locate a prison in downtown Milwaukee. Our campaigns focused on issues, and the voters ultimately chose my vision for the state.
Tony and I continued to discuss important issues even after our hard fought race. In particular, Tony had a national reputation on water policy and I shared his vision for the future of the Great Lakes. I named him as my representative on the new Great Lakes Protection Fund and asked him to find ways to improve water quality across the basin. I trusted Tony to make good decisions and his leadership led to investments that continue to serve Wisconsin and the entire region. My last conversation with my friend Tony was at his apartment in Madison, not long before he died in 2023.
Supreme Court campaign featured vicious and sickening attacks
Louis and Tony came to mind as I watched the recent Supreme Court race with disgust. I have no doubt both court candidates are well-intentioned public servants, but the nature of today's politics pushed them to engage in vicious, sickening attacks that went beyond questioning their opponent's qualifications to disparaging their ethics and morality.
Do I believe Susan Crawford or Brad Schimel think child rapists should be given light sentences and released back into the community to reoffend? Of course not. But $100 million of negative, nauseating advertising went on the air to make us all believe just that.
Opinion: Musk, billionaires took over Wisconsin Supreme Court race. The joke is on us.
I am not so naïve to propose turning back the clock to some idealized version of 1966 when candidates ran campaigns that focused on issues. Campaigning has always been a rough business where candidates occasionally have to throw and take an elbow. But I join the many voters today who are sick of the politics of personal destruction that tear down an opponent rather than uplift us with ideas and positive visions for the future.
Wisconsin is more than a year away from the next round of statewide elections that will determine who controls the governorship and Legislature. I hope my fellow citizens will use that time to insist that candidates focus on issues and treat their opponents with respect. Unless voters demand better, we can expect campaigns to spiral deeper into the abyss of vitriol and destruction.
By the way, if candidates have $100 million to throw into negative advertising, they might consider putting that money to better use by building hospitals and schools. Okay, there I go being naïve.
Tommy G. Thompson was elected governor of Wisconsin four times, serving from 1987 to 2001. In 2001, he became Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, a post he held for four years. He previously served in the State Assembly from 1967 to his election as governor.
This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Unless voters demand better, campaigns will spiral deeper | Opinion
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


New York Times
an hour ago
- New York Times
Live Updates: Tensions Flare Between Protesters and Law Enforcement in L.A.
News Analysis National Guard troops in Los Angeles on Sunday. Gov. Gavin Newsom of California has formally asked the Trump administration to remove them. It is the fight President Trump had been waiting for, a showdown with a top political rival in a deep blue state over an issue core to his political agenda. In bypassing the authority of Gov. Gavin Newsom of California, a Democrat, to call in the National Guard to quell protests in the Los Angeles area over his administration's efforts to deport more migrants, Mr. Trump is now pushing the boundaries of presidential authority and stoking criticism that he is inflaming the situation for political gain. Local and state authorities had not sought help in dealing with the scattered protests that erupted after an immigration raid on Friday in the garment district. But Mr. Trump and his top aides leaned into the confrontation with California leaders on Sunday, portraying the demonstrations as an existential threat to the country — setting in motion an aggressive federal response that in turn sparked new protests across the city. As more demonstrators took to the streets, the president wrote on social media that Los Angeles was being 'invaded and occupied' by 'violent, insurrectionist mobs,' and directed three of his top cabinet officials to take any actions necessary to 'liberate Los Angeles from the Migrant Invasion.' 'Nobody's going to spit on our police officers. Nobody's going to spit on our military,' Mr. Trump told reporters as he headed to Camp David on Sunday, although it was unclear whether any such incidents had occurred. 'That happens, they get hit very hard.' The president declined to say whether he planned to invoke the 1807 Insurrection Act, which allows for the use of federal troops on domestic soil to quell a rebellion. But either way, he added, 'we're going to have troops everywhere.' Stephen Miller, the White House deputy chief of staff, posted on social media that 'this is a fight to save civilization.' Mr. Trump's decision to deploy at least 2,000 members of the California National Guard is the latest example of his willingness and, at times, an eagerness to shatter norms to pursue his political goals and bypass limits on presidential power. The last president to send in the National Guard for a domestic operation without a request from the state's governor, Lyndon B. Johnson, did so in 1965, to protect civil rights demonstrators in Alabama. Image President Donald Trump in New Jersey on Sunday. On social media, he, his aides and allies have sought to frame the demonstrations against immigration officials on their own terms. Credit... Haiyun Jiang for The New York Times But aides and allies of the president say the events unfolding in Los Angeles provide an almost perfect distillation of why Mr. Trump was elected in November. 'It could not be clearer,' said Newt Gingrich, the former Republican House speaker and ally of the president who noted that Mr. Trump had been focused on immigration enforcement since 2015. 'One side is for enforcing the law and protecting Americans, and the other side is for defending illegals and being on the side of the people who break the law.' Sporadic protests have occurred across the country in recent days as federal agents have descended on Los Angeles and other cities searching workplaces for undocumented immigrants, part of an expanded effort by the administration to ramp up the number of daily deportations. On social media, Mr. Trump, his aides and allies have sought to frame the demonstrations against immigration officials on their own terms. They have shared images and videos of the most violent episodes — focusing particularly on examples of protesters lashing out at federal agents — even as many remained peaceful. Officials also zeroed in on demonstrators waving flags of other countries, including Mexico and El Salvador, as evidence of a foreign invasion. 'Illegal criminal aliens and violent mobs have been committing arson, throwing rocks at vehicles, and attacking federal law enforcement for days,' wrote Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary. Mr. Newsom, whom the president refers to as 'Newscum,' has long been a foil for Mr. Trump, who has repeatedly targeted California and its leader as emblematic of failures of the Democratic Party. 'We expected this, we prepared for this,' Mr. Newsom said in a statement to The New York Times. 'This is not surprising — for them to succeed, California must fail, and so they're going to try everything in their tired playbook despite the evidence against them.' Image Law enforcement officers and members of the California National Guard engaged protesters in downtown Los Angeles on Sunday. Credit... Gabriela Bhaskar/The New York Times On Sunday, the governor sent a letter to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth formally requesting that Mr. Trump rescind the call-up of the National Guard, saying federal actions were inflaming the situation. He was echoed by other Democratic officials, who said the mounting demonstrations were the result of Mr. Trump's own actions. The president and his aides 'are masters of misinformation and disinformation,' Senator Alex Padilla of California, a Democrat, said in an interview. 'They create a crisis of their own making and come in with all the theatrics and cruelty of immigration enforcement. They should not be surprised in a community like Los Angeles they will be met by demonstrators who are very passionate about standing up for fundamental rights and due process.' Republicans defended Mr. Trump's moves, saying he was rightfully exercising his power to protect public safety. 'The president is extremely concerned about the safety of federal officials in L.A. right now who have been subject to acts of violence and harassment and obstruction,' Representative Kevin Kiley, Republican of California, said in an interview. He added: 'We are in this moment because of a series of reckless decisions by California's political leaders, the aiding and abetting the open-border policies of President Biden.' Trump officials said on Sunday that they were ready to escalate their response even more, if necessary. Tom Homan, the president's border czar, suggested in an interview with NBC News that the administration would arrest anyone, including public officials, who interfered with immigration enforcement activities, which he said would continue in California and across the country. Image Protesters in Pasadena, Calif., on Sunday. Credit... Alex Welsh for The New York Times Mr. Trump appears to be deploying against California a similar playbook that he has used to punish universities, law firms and other institutions and individuals that he views as political adversaries. Last month, he threatened to strip 'large scale' federal funding from California 'maybe permanently' over the inclusion of transgender athletes in women's sports. And in recent days, his administration said it would pull roughly $4 billion in federal funding for California's high-speed train, which would further delay a project that has long been plagued by delays and funding shortages. 'Everything he's done to attack California or anybody he fears isn't supportive of him is going to continue to be an obsession of his,' Mr. Padilla said. 'He may think it plays smart for his base, but it's actually been bad for the country.' White House officials said there was a different common denominator that explains Mr. Trump's actions both against institutions like Harvard and immigration protests in Los Angeles. 'For years Democrat-run cities and institutions have failed the American people, by both choice and incompetence,' Abigail Jackson, a White House spokeswoman, said in a statement. 'In each instance,' she added, 'the president took necessary action to protect Americans when Democrats refused.'
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Speaker Johnson teases follow-ups to the ‘one big, beautiful bill'
The 'one big, beautiful bill' may not be so singular, after all. Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) is teasing follow-up legislation to the megabill of President Trump's tax cut and spending priorities that Republicans can push though using the same special budget reconciliation process that requires only GOP votes. That tool can be used once per fiscal year, with the current fiscal year ending on Sept. 30. So after Republicans are done with the 'big, beautiful bill,' the GOP trifecta has, in theory, two more shots to muscle through party-line legislation before the next Congress comes into power after the midterms. Johnson floated plans for a second reconciliation bill while rebutting concerns from deficit hawks on the budget impact of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act — which includes an extension of tax cuts and boosts to border and defense funding, with costs offset in part by new requirements on low-income assistance programs like Medicaid and food aid. 'Everyone here wants to reduce spending,' Johnson said Friday morning on CNBC. 'But you have to do that in a sequence of events. We have a plan, OK? This is the first of a multistep process.' 'We're going to have another reconciliation bill that follows this one, possibly a third one before this Congress is up, because you can have a reconciliation bill for each budget year, each fiscal year. So that's ahead of us,' Johnson continued, also pointing to separate plans to claw back money based on recommendations from the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). 'We're also doing rescissions packages. We got the first one delivered this week from the White House, and that will codify many of the DOGE cuts.' The promise of another reconciliation bill is somewhat surprising given the crux of the debate that dominated the early weeks of the year: Should Republicans divide up their agenda into two bills, passing the first quickly to give Trump an early win on boosting funding for border enforcement and deportations? Or would putting all of Trump's priorities into one bill — which would contain both bitter pills and sweeteners for different factions of the razor-thin majority — be a better political strategy? Trump eventually said he preferred 'one big, beautiful bill,' a moniker that became the legislation's official title in the House last month. It's not clear what would be in a second piece of legislation. Multiple House Republicans who spoke with The Hill were unaware of plans for more reconciliation bills and were not sure what could be included in them. 'I think we need to see what's left on the table after the first one,' Rep. Michael Cloud (R-Texas) said. And to muster through multiple reconciliation bills is a delicate prospect. If members know more reconciliation bills are coming, that complicates the argument that everything in the current package — even policies some factions dislike that others love — need to stay in one megabill. The Speaker declined to elaborate on what might be in such a package when asked in a press conference last week. 'I'm not going to tell you that,' Johnson said. 'Let's get the first one done.' 'Look, I say this is the beginning of a process, and what you're going to see is a continuing of us identifying waste, fraud, abuse in government, which is our pledge of common sense, restoring common sense and fiscal sanity. So we have lots of ideas of things that might be in that package.' Republicans had started planning for the current legislative behemoth months before the 2024 election so they would be prepared to quickly execute on their policy wish list if they won the majority. 'This isn't something we just drew up overnight. So, we'll go through that same laborious process,' Johnson said. But some members have ideas of what else they'd like to see. Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) said that he'd hope a second bill would do more to tackle rolling back green energy tax credits and make further spending cuts. Ultimately, though, it will be Trump's call, Norman said: 'I know when the president gets involved, it adds a lot of value.' And Rep. August Pfluger (R-Texas) speculated that passing the 'big, beautiful bill' would inspire members to keep going with another bill. 'People like the feeling of winning,' Pfluger said. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
DNC chair on leaked call says Hogg ‘essentially destroyed' initial credibility
Democratic National Committee (DNC) Chair Ken Martin said in a recent party meeting that Vice Chair David Hogg has 'essentially destroyed' his chances of leading the DNC successfully, according to leaked audio obtained by Politico. Martin seemed to get choked up as he addressed Hogg, who rose to national prominence as a gun control activist and has pledged to primary Democrats he sees as ineffective in pushing back against President Trump and the GOP. 'No one knows who the hell I am, right? I'm trying to get my sea legs underneath of me and actually develop any amount of credibility so I can go out there and raise the money and do the job I need to, to put ourselves in a position to win,' Martin told other DNC leaders on the call. 'And again, I don't think you intended this, but you essentially destroyed any chance I have to show the leadership what I need to. It's really frustrating,' Martin said. Politico reported that the conversation took place on a Zoom meeting of DNC officers on May 15, a few days after the DNC recommended new elections on procedural grounds for seats held by Hogg and one other vice chair. Members will decide on Monday whether to hold new elections. In the recording, Martin told Hogg that he respected the progressive activist but said the intraparty drama has led him to question whether it's worth continuing in the post. 'I'll say, look, it has plenty of warts, and we're all trying to change those, for sure, but the longer we continue this fight, the harder it is for us to actually do what we all want to do, which is make a difference in this country again,' Martin said in the meeting. 'So I deeply respect you, David. I, too, was looking forward to working with you, but this has created a situation, and I'll be very honest with you, for the first time in my 100 days on this job … the other night, I said to myself, for the first time, I don't know if I want to do this anymore.' In a statement to The Hill, Martin said, 'I'm not going anywhere.' 'I took this job to fight Republicans, not Democrats. As I said when I was elected, our fight is not within the Democratic Party, our fight is and has to be solely focused on Donald Trump and the disastrous Republican agenda,' he said. 'That's the work that I will continue to do every day.' Symone Sanders Townsend, an MSNBC host and former Democratic adviser, came to Martin's defense in a post on the social platform X on Sunday. 'Ken Martin had a vulnerable moment w/his vice chairs & other leaders on a call. Someone recorded it + shared it. Seems to me THAT anonymous person has no business anywhere near the DNC,' she wrote. 'As a former DNC member, it's quite clear there are too many people currently in roles for the wrong reasons. From the outside looking in, I don't think Ken Martin is one of them.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.