The last of my three local topics about the recall was whether 13th Senate District race between Scott Fitzgerald and Lori Compas will have any lasting significance for politics in that area (whether in the new or old 13th District).

(For previous posts about the 13th District and its candidates, see The Fitzgerald-Compas Debate in the 13th Senate District, Sen. Fitzgerald’s foolish contention that recall challenger Lori Compas isn’t running her own campaign, and The Democrats’ Recall Forum @ UW-Whitewater (Compas and Jorgensen edition).)

I said that I thought the race would have lasting impact, and I think it will. Here’s why.

Although most politicians, no matter how powerful, fade quickly when not in office or running for office, I think that Lori Compas has a chance at a continuing, and memorable, career. That may seem an odd contention, considering that it’s Fitzgerald who won, and Fitzgerald who’s a senate leader, and Fitzgerald who’s been so much in the news (especially since becoming majority leader). Fitzgerald, after all, carried the district by a wide margin, 47,116 to 32,870.

How could the results be auspicious for Compas?

First, Fitzgerald, no matter how influential, just isn’t a popular statewide figure for the GOP. There are two Republicans who have that political-celebrity status in their party: Scott Walker and Paul Ryan. (Tommy Thompson was once like that, too, but the party he led has changed.) Other Republicans, no matter how influential now (the Fitzgeralds, Robin Vos, Ron Johnson), just don’t have anything like the appeal of Walker and Ryan.

For Democrats, one has Russ Feingold and Tammy Baldwin, and then there’s everyone else. (Neither Barrett nor Falk have anything like the appeal that Feingold and Baldwin have among Democrats.)

Compas’s race (and prior recall-drive leadership) drew the attention of Democrats across the state, and received the notice of influential politicians, reporters, columnists, and activists outside her district. So much so that even if Democrat John Lehman defeats Van Wanggaard, Compas will still be as well known among leading statewide Democrats.

Second, much of Compas’s status among Democrats owes to her work as a recall organizer, before she became a candidate. She began her work in a particular order: recall first, candidacy second. There are lots of candidates; there aren’t as many people who go door-to-door in the winter to collect thousands of petition signatures. She couldn’t have been certain of success when she started, let alone that she would become the 13th District’s recall candidate.

How she began her efforts is much to her credit among Democrats.

Third, she’ll be able to run or organize again, having come through the campaign ably, and more skilled at its end than its beginning. (Fitzgerald didn’t change at all, and having been in office for so many ears, was unlikely to change. It’s Republicans like Walker and Ryan who have, so to speak, upward mobility.)

Compas does, too. She may embrace additional political work, or eschew it all. (I have no idea.) She could, though, easily continue, whether as a candidate or organizer.

Most political careers begin when a candidate wins, but Compas’s – if she wants one — will have started earlier, when she organized a recall within her senate district. That career may be the lasting legacy of the 13th District race.

Last week, I posted a task list with three questions about the June 5th recall election. Here is the first of those three: What do the June 5th results say, if anything, about how the race in the 43rd Assembly District will finish? In this discussion, I’m referring to the newly-redistricted 43rd. The old 43rd has been a seat with small margins (mostly) for the winning party. How’s the new 43rd likely to go this November? It’s a contest between GOP freshman incumbent Evan Wynn and Democratic rep Andy Jorgensen (now of the 37th District).

Immediately below is a map of the new 43rd.

How the new 43rd voted. Looking at Walker-Barrett numbers from across the precincts in the district, one finds that Barrett received 11,687 to Walker’s 10,690 votes. That’s significantly better for Barrett than his statewide average, where he lost to Walker 53-46% (1,334,450 to 1,162,785).  (Results from these precincts are from the respective county websites before canvass results.)

What’s in the new 43rd? There are nearly twenty communities in the new 43rd, that largest of them being Whitewater, Milton, and Edgerton. Much of the district in the same as the old 43rd, but it stretches father west now, among other slight changes.

The old district has typically been closely contested, and the Walker-Barrett numbers in the new district’s precincts (52.2-47.6%) fall in that past pattern.

2010
Kim Hixson 9,448 47.5%
Evan Wynn 10,449 52.5%

2008
Kim Hixson* 15,303 51.2%
Debi Towns 14,581 48.8%

2006
Kim Hixson 10,330 50.02%
Debi Towns 10,292 49.83%

2004
Matt McIntyre 12,796 44.4%
Debi Towns 15,960 55.4%

What’s unexpected? That even after redistricting, the new district’s precincts leaned slightly left on June 5th, despite a statewide Walker win that was comfortable, and greater than his 2010 win. The new 43rd is a close outlier, rather than an example of the statewide results.

Obama-Romney instead of Walker-Barrett. However the presidential election in Wisconsin goes this fall, it’s hard to see Gov. Romney doing better in November than Gov. Walker did this June. Romney may do well. (At the beginning of the year, I predicted that Romney would win Wisconsin, a prediction that seems less probable now.) It’s hard to see, though, how he would do as well, let alone better, than Gov. Walker did this month. That might happen if the Obama campaign somehow collapses, as Carter’s did in 1980, but for ever 1980 there are closer contests to be found in 1988, 2000, and 2004.)

Ticket splitting seems unlikely. It’s possible, but improbable, that Obama could carry the state, and the slighter bluer new 43rd, and the Democrats could still lose the 43rd seat. That would require, however, a combination of Obama and Wynn voters. That seems unlikely, and even more unlikely (to the point of nearly impossible) is that either down-ballot candidate would run ahead of the presidential ticket. Even longstanding incumbents don’t receive votes over the top of the ballot. Easiest prediction in the world: it won’t happen here in November.

Relatively new, all around. Wynn is a freshman incumbent, and Jorgensen is a multi-term incumbent from another (redistricted) seat. Wynn is better known to most of the district, but neither one is an entrenched incumbent.  The old 43rd would move as statewide or national trends did).  Bucking the statewide trend was something that I did not expect for the precincts of the new 43rd, but it’s still not a decisively blue or red district.

Considering how well Gov. Walker did statewide, it is surprising to me that the GOP still trailed in a redistricted 43rd.  Redistricting benefits a majority party, but not so much here, one sees, as other places.

Where are the votes?  There are some surprises for Whitewater voters, here.  For Wynn, a Whitewater resident, neither Whitewater, nor Milton, nor Edgerton offer strongholds.  On the contrary, the three leading communities for Barrett votes (Whitewater 1988, Edgerton  1536, and Milton 1337) won’t offer Republicans better prospects in November (absent a Democratic collapse) than they did in June.   Although many residents like to think of their respective towns as vital to an electoral outcome, there are better prospects for Wynn in Koshkonong, Whitewater beyond  the city , or rural communities in the district.  The results would be different without the margins in these three cities (respectively, 528, 755, 254).  Walker outperformed Barrett in the rest of district other than those three cities.

For Jorgensen, Whitewater, Milton, and Edgerton are opportunities; for Wynn, the rest of the district is a better playing field.  For me, the real question for the fall is (1) how well Romney (Wynn) does in the most rural parts of the district, and (2) how well Obama (Jorgensen) does in these cities.  One could keep margins down in an opponent’s strongholds, of course, but there’s only so much time and money available.  Maximizing turnout in favorable areas would seem to make more sense, especially in a race between Obama and Romney.

It’s  less a two-person contest in places like Whitewater than it is a contest between different parts of the district.  This has been true with the old 43rd, it seems even more clear after looking at the results of the new 43rd’s voting on June 5th.

Odds.  It’s fundamentally a ticket battle (Obama-Romney) in the 43rd, as neither candidate is a long-term incumbent in the district.  It is surprising to me that the redistricted area was not configured more favorably toward the GOP’s legislative majority, and that the precinct totals within the new district bucked the June 5th statewide vote.  That statewide vote was comfortable for Gov. Walker; the results here were in contrast to that outcome.

I’d say it’s a slightly blue district, likely to favor candidates farther down on an Obama ballot (Jorgensen) over opposing ones farther down on a Romney ticket (Wynn).