Francesca Hong and the centrist bogeyman of "electibility"

Vol. 90

In This Issue: ESSAY | TAKE ACTION | FINAL FRAME

As the August 11 primary in Wisconsin draws ever closer, if one listens closely, it’s possible to hear the great wailing and gnashing of teeth coming from many of the state’s most prominent centrist Democrats.

They are seemingly terrified of Rep. Francesca Hong winning their party’s nomination for governor. Why? Well it’s certainly not because she’s a woman, or Korean American, or a single mom, or a Democratic Socialist, of course not! No, not any of that. It’s that they’re afraid other people won’t vote for her because of those things. “B-b-but electability!” they cry out while rending their garments.

“Electability” is too often code for “I don’t like this person or their politics but I’m not brave enough to just come out and say it so I’ll hide it under faux concern about how the constructed ‘other’ in my head won’t vote for her.” It’s a kind of cowardly elitism, a way to throw other people under the bus for beliefs they may or may not actually have rather than take responsibility for your own.

Wisconsin is a deeply purple state. I’m not here to argue that Hong’s road to the governor’s office will be remotely easy or guaranteed. But it’s also not so far-fetched or awful as so many pundits would have us believe. Wisconsin has a delightfully storied history of electing socialists, for one. There’s also a clear wave across the country right now of electing DSA candidates and toppling both GOP and longtime centrist Democratic office holders. Not to mention, there's a significant bipartisan wave of people pissed off about data centers being forced into their communities, and plenty of former Trump voters (farmers in particular) who’ve been so thoroughly hosed by his “policies” that they’ve professed readiness to flip parties. If any time was ripe for a dark horse candidate, it’s now.

Let’s turn to a recent op-ed from Cap Times publisher and longtime centrist mouthpiece, Paul Fanlund, for a perfect example of the types of misdirection and outright distortions being directed at Hong (by people who should know better) as she surges in the polls.

Fanlund does what he does best in this piece, which is to insert a series of seemingly casual “facts” into his column that paint Hong in a very specific light, while never actually saying he won’t support her or that you shouldn’t either. That would be uncouth!

What Fanlund is more than happy to do, however, is lead the reader to believe that there’s a large undercurrent of terror from Democratic powerbrokers and voters who may simply not be willing to support her. Why? People are worried she’s not electable. It’s like a snake eating its own tail. If people are worried that other people won’t vote for someone, maybe they won’t vote for that person, either! But maybe it’s time we stopped voting based on perceived electability and started voting based on who we think would best serve our interests in that office. WILD IDEA, I KNOW!

But the real red meat of Fanlund’s non-argument comes in a section where he steps fully into concern troll mode while also accusing her of being too mean:

For two months, many longtime Democrats have been asking privately not who I think the best governor might be, but which candidate has the best chance of defeating Hong.

More recently, given Hong’s polling margins, some of those same people — people who have supported Democrats for decades with votes, volunteering and dollars — have even told me they might not vote for governor if Hong is the nominee.

In part, they are reacting to attacks on fellow Democrats by Hong and other democratic socialists who seem to paint anyone not with them — even people who regard themselves as long-term mainstream liberals — as complicit in causing our shared MAGA-era suffering.

Hong’s campaign has been the most consistently on-message and positive, though. She welcomed Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley’s return to the race. Her statements about other candidates dropping out have all been friendly and generous. I’ve never seen her go after anyone but presumptive GOP nominee Tom Tiffany and Republicans generally when giving speeches or engaging in debates. 

Fanlund’s argument that Hong has “attacked” fellow Democrats feels like throwing a tantrum because she’s rightly called out the times when people who claim to be left/liberal align with the interests of the GOP and its fascist agenda. We have to be able to criticize things within our own parties and movements, otherwise we become as bad as the lock-step Republican Party. And if it’s a requirement to run for or win higher office to never criticize anyone in your party or adjacent to it, then I’m afraid we’ll have to disqualify just about everyone, Paul.

Then we get into a bit where Fanlund shows his real hand, which seems to be fear of appropriately taxing the highest income earners:

Her campaign seems constructed on costly promises that will all be paid by much higher income taxes. A recent Tiffany press release highlighted an Assembly bill Hong sponsored that would roughly double the top state income tax rate, making it 4 percent higher than high-tax California. 

Another nice little bait-and-switch, where he starts by saying Hong wants to pass higher income taxes generally, but then clarifies that what the bill she co-authored in 2025 actually proposed was increasing the rate of the highest earners (i.e. it would apply to taxpayers with taxable income of at least $750,000 for single taxpayers, and $1 million for married couples filing jointly. It set the bracket’s rate at 17.30% for tax year 2025 and 17.70% for subsequent years. The bill did not pass).

Hong’s current platform isn’t even that–people should be allowed and encouraged to evolve their positions and plans over time, after all–but rather aims for a more modest increase that comes alongside a wider plan to adjust income and property taxes, among other things, in order to decrease the burden on the vast majority of people in the state. Increasing taxes on the very wealthy is something that’s increasingly popular, by the way.

The op-ed wouldn’t be complete, though, without getting in a dig at Hong for appearing with favorite leftist boogeyman, Hasan Piker.

But we got a glimpse of how Hong might perform in a general election on Friday when she spoke with Dana Perino on Fox News. Perino introduced Hong by airing a clip of her appearing with controversial Twitch streamer Hasan Piker, who has been called antisemitic.

Notice how Fanlund himself won’t say that Piker is antisemitic, just that he has been called that by…someone, somewhere. For the record, multiple candidates for office have appeared on his show over time. And while Piker’s record is far from spotless, his platform reaches millions of predominantly younger people and is essentially the only such platform for the left to compete against the vast rightwing online ecosystem that enjoys far more funding and reach. 

Look, if Paul Fanlund and his centrist brethren can’t bring themselves to support Francesca Hong, that’s their business and their right. My issue is that they tend to come at it from such a disingenuous and oblique angle, distorting Hong’s record and platform while casting sideways aspirations at her affiliations and style, and sowing seeds of doubt about her “electibility” - without offering anything of substance as an alternative.

And that’s the bigger issue with their so-called “centrism.” At this point, the Overton window has shifted so far to the right that these alleged moderates are just papering over positions that are fundamentally conservative. We have suffered long enough under conservatism and its associated austerity and oppression. People are tired and pissed off. We want leaders in office with actual vision for and ability to make our day-to-day lives more liveable, not just corporate puppets who tell us to “wait, take it slow, don’t worry, don’t try to change too much too fast, trust us, don’t mind me raking in cash via holding this position of power while never doing anything of substance to make things better for regular working people.”

So while much of the recent press around Hong, thanks to both the Tiffany and Crowley campaigns, is focused on taking her past tweets as unchangeable gospel without any nuance, Hong has remained focused on what her current plans and hopes are for Wisconsinites. I hope that continues to be the case from her and more candidates for office in general. 

And I hope the Fanlund’s of the world finally decide to get off their fence posts and get into the trenches with the rest of us.

##

P.S. In the interest of being more transparent and direct than the Fanlund’s of the world, I’ll add this: I’ve known Fran for years and have had the pleasure of chatting with her more than a few times. She’s been a fixture in the service industry and music/arts world of Madison, in addition to her tireless work as grassroots activist and politician. She was literally bartending at a downtown music venue where my band has played many times up until she launched her campaign for governor. If you’ve ever had the chance to speak with Fran directly, you get the immediate sense of a real and regular human being who cares deeply about the well-being of every single person in this city and state. You don’t have to agree with every single policy position or specific turn of phrase to trust that she and the team she surrounds herself with are far more interested in building a better world than they are in self-aggrandizement or money or power. For whatever my word is worth, know that to be true. Fran’s not perfect, but she’s the real deal. Perhaps most importantly, she knows that to be a good and effective public servant, it’s never about just one person or a cult of personality. It’s about building coalitions, being in community, showing up, and effective teamwork, including the whole diverse, messy, beautiful swath of humanity that makes up our communities. 

Take Action.

Please vote on Tuesday - and make sure the folks around you have a plan to vote (including transportation, as needed)! You can find your polling place, what’s on your ballot, etc. here: https://myvote.wi.gov/en-us. 

Final Frame.

I had the privilege of going on a work assignment to film the buffalo herd at Nachusa Grasslands in northern Illinois last week. It’s a humbling thing to be surrounded by this big extended family, in a place that’s one of the few remaining stretches of native grassland/prairie in an area that used to be almost entirely that. Absolutely gorgeous.

Nachusa is just a two hour drive due south of Madison and has a lovely visitor center, hiking trails, and you can often view the buffalo (from a distance), too.

‘Til next time.

Take care of yourself and of each other. Free Palestine. Abolish ICE.

This newsletter is an AI-free, venture capital-free, bespoke labor of love. If you like my writing, please consider supporting my work with a paid Grist From the Mills subscription - or just send me a tip in the amount of your choice and/or share this newsletter with a friend.

NOTE: The opinions expressed in this newsletter are solely my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my employer.