Talk:2024 Wisconsin Senate election

incumbents

@Talthiel: on district 28, I saw the incumbent Julian Bradley stated publicly that he was preparing to relocate in order to maintain residency in that district and run for re-election in 2024. I defer to you on whether he should be listed there or if we wait to see if he actually files with a new address. -- Asdasdasdff (talk) 21:14, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

I think we should hold it off until he actually moves back. Though we could list him in the candidates section of the table in the meantime. Though it might be less complicated to just wait. Talthiel (talk) 00:50, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

@Talthiel: Do you have a more recent source on Rachael Cabral-Guevara placing her in the 18th Senate district? The address she listed for the 2022 election is on Stroebe Island, which is still part of the 19th Senate district after the 2024 redistricting (though just barely). Asdasdasdff (talk) 01:16, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Ah then I can change it. Talthiel (talk) 01:48, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

To mention something else, I hope the system I've set out in the table for showing moved incumbents who intend to move back to their districts works. which currently applies to Senator Cowles announcing he intends to move back to the 2nd district, and Senator Bradley announcing his intention to move back to the 28th to run there, So while they do not yet live there, and are listed in the districts they were moved into, I have listed them as declared candidates within those two districts they intend on running in @Asdasdasdff. I think we could work with that as convention for candidates who were moved, whether it is for Senate or Assembly, what do you think about that? Talthiel (talk) 17:05, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, I think it works as long as we have reliable info about where people were residing as of February 2024. If I were building it from scratch, I think I'd still go with the last-elected senator in each district in incumbent column, but this seems to get the important information across. I'm really looking forward to those WEC candidate nominating petition reports though. -- Asdasdasdff (talk) 18:03, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree! Also, on a side note, do you think it's sure enough that the districts are here to stay that you might begin editing the various district's pages to account for redistricting? I know you said you'd wait for more assurance, and I think candidates retiring/announcing they are moving seems to be confirmation enough. @Asdasdasdff Talthiel (talk) 18:08, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm starting to feel confident. I've started writing the edits in notepad files on my computer, so I have a bunch of edits ready to deploy. I'm about.. halfway through the 132. The maps will take longer. -- Asdasdasdff (talk) 18:38, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

What I'd REALLY like is to see before I start pushing edits, though, is for the LRB to officially publish the maps with population demographics so that I can utilize their official publication as the reference on these district articles. Otherwise I'm pointing to DavesRedistricting.org, which is a nice tool but not really an official document. -- Asdasdasdff (talk) 18:49, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

I have a feeling the LRB already has many of these stats, although that's just a hunch and I don't actually know, since the LRB has one of the least user-friendly webpages for a gov't agency. Talthiel (talk) 19:17, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Since apparently some sites I've looked through (for incumbency/moves for districts) says they cite the LRB analysis on the subject, but I obviously have no idea where they found that. Talthiel (talk) 19:18, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Actually one other thing I've done, for both pages, is remove indications of candidacy for those reps/candidates who have been moved to new districts from the ones they declared for. And I intend to update that as people decide whether to move or not. One example being I removed the indication that Rep. Joers was running since he is now deciding on whether to run against Rep. Bare, who did declare he will run in the district Talthiel (talk) 19:23, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

@Asdasdasdff To revisit this I have thought about setting up the table to show the following for Marklein and Jacque regarding their redistricting situations:

Dist.	Incumbent				This race
	Member	Party	First elected	Status	Declared candidate(s) and ballot status
02	None (open seat)			New member to be elected	▌Robert Cowles (Rep.) declared
08	Dan Knodl	Rep.	2023 (special)	Incumbent retiring	▌Duey Stroebel (Rep.) declared
	Duey Stroebel (Redistricted from the 20th district)	Rep.	2015 (special)	Incumbent Running
14	Howard Marklein (Redistricted from the 17th district)	Rep.	2014	Serving as Senator for the 17th district
18	None (open seat)			New member to be elected
20	Dan Feyen (Redistricted from the 18th district)	Rep.	2016	Running
28	None (open seat)			New member to be elected	▌Julian Bradley (Rep.) declared
30	Eric Wimberger	Rep.	2020	TBD
	Robert Cowles (Redistricted from the 2nd district)	Rep.	1987 (special)	Running for the 2nd district
	André Jacque (Redistricted from the 1st district)	Rep.	2018	Serving as Senator for the 1st district

Does this system, where shading is used to show they are serving as senators for the odd-numbered districts, work? Or is it unnecesarily complex. I might be getting speculative but I have an assumption Jacque and Marklein do not intend to run in their new districts, as it would mean resigning from their current ones, but they might not move until 2025, or even later, until the 2026 elections. So I would still have them listed for the 2024 election cycle as being redistricted into the 30th and 14th district respectively. Talthiel (talk) 22:53, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

I think that's fine. Maybe append to the status message ", term expires January 4, 2027" or something like that to make it clear they will still be in office even if they don't get elected this year. But yeah, I don't expect either of them to run this year; I assume they will either move, run for a different office, or retire before the 2026 election. -- Asdasdasdff (talk) 23:12, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Election Map

@OutlawRun So a couple things regarding the map, I don't think you should use the darker color to indicate districts held by Dems which are now left open. since some examples are in the 2024 map (File:2024 United States House of Representatives elections retirements or losses of renomination map.svg), which has Lauren Boebert's district, as well as Barry Moore's district greyed out. Even if they're incumbents they've been drawn into another district so their old districts are, as of now, open for 2024, and I think the map for the WI senate (and eventually Assembly if one is made) should follow a similar convention. So I would have the 2nd, 4th, 16th, 18th, and 28th left in a lighter shade of grey. Talthiel (talk) 22:39, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

(I did just realize I could change the map, but I am not familiar with editing wikipedia svgs and wanted to let you know) Talthiel (talk) 22:40, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Retirements

So I had a random thought @Asdasdasdff, how should we handle the intentions of Sen. Jacque? Since he was redistricted into thr 30th, represents the 1st until 2026, but has announced his intentions to run for the 8th Congressional district, should we list him under the list of retiring incumbents (currently only Knodl and Agard are listed)? Talthiel (talk) 01:54, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

I would not list him as an "outgoing incumbent", since his decision to run for Congress does not result in him automatically vacating any chance of remaining in office as Senator in January 2025. He'd only be leaving office if he wins the congressional seat, which is--imo--a long shot for him. I suspect he'll be state Senator still in 2025, and will relocate in order to run for re-election in the 1st Senate district in 2026. I would just maybe add to his row in the candidates table "also running for U.S. House" or however you want to phrase that. -- Asdasdasdff (talk) 16:10, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Using sub-headings

@Asdasdasdff Something I tinkered with, could we possibly use sub-headings in each of the district boxes in the table? I'm thinking about it for linking purposes but I'm on the fence as it looks odd in formatting, should we even do it? But regardless, I just wanted to get your thoughts on it. Talthiel (talk) 16:31, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Can I see an example of what you're thinking? -- Asdasdasdff (talk) 16:34, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

So the idea I had is on my Sandbox, though like I said I think it looks weird with the [edit] part in the table. Talthiel (talk) 16:37, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Oh wow. Hm. I dunno, I don't think its necessary when the data is already so compact. If we want to do more on individual races, I'd say maybe a new section after the table where individual districts get their own subsection with more narrative and background. -- Asdasdasdff (talk) 06:32, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

if we do this, should we wait until certain times like the primary or general, or could we set that sort of thing up now? Talthiel (talk) 16:52, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

I'd say at least wait for the petitions to start coming in. Although there may be a couple districts where we already know its going to be noteworthy. -- Asdasdasdff (talk) 19:07, 18 April 2024 (UTC)