Talk:2023 Wisconsin Supreme Court election

"Combined" primary results map
I don't want this to become an edit war, so let's try and reach a consensus here. I understand where the desire for a map that "combined" both Dem-aligned and GOP-aligned candidates, however there is no precedent for doing this. The Superintendent of Public Instruction elections use the same primary/general system and in the last one it was not even a topic of debate, and in none of the other Supreme Court election articles has it been done. It's also a somewhat presumptuous thing to map, for example someone seeing a combined primary vote map for the 2020 SC election might be confused when looking at the results of the general and seeing them 12 points to the left. I personally think it's a map-type best left to Twitter and the like, but I welcome discussion. AveryTheComrade (talk) 07:46, 22 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Thanks for initiating the discussion. Although I see your points, the merit of the map, IMO, overweight the drawbacks.
 * The plurality map only shows who's on top in each county, overlooking the massive vote split (especially on the conservative side). For example, the Republican strongholds of Ozaukee County and vast parts of rural Wisconsin were colored in as Protasiewicz counties. To a by standard, it may give off the false impression of a Protasiewicz blowout. The combined map offers a more comprehensive and accurate picture going into the general (and allows future readers to more easily compare the primary and general election performance of the two camps). A lack of precedent doesn't mean it can't start from this election, especially given its higher-than-usual profile and divisiveness. 沁水湾 (talk) 08:46, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Just going to weigh in with my thoughts, but don't really care one way or the other on the outcome. So this is a kind of unique situation where we have 2 conservatives and 2 liberals; we haven't had a 4 person Supreme Court primary in my memory.  So this configuration of candidates maybe lends itself to more of the combined analysis since both liberals and conservatives are keen to turn out to make sure 1 of theirs gets on the general election ballot.  On the other hand, these are candidates running as individuals in a plurality race, and we don't want to imply that there's perfect overlap of the conservative and liberal support bases.  Personally, I think there's probably going to be significant overlap in Dorow's voters and Protasiewicz' -- even though they are identified as having a different ideology.  Also there's kind of an inherent misrepresentation with over-interpreting primary results as descriptive of anything beyond the preferences and turnout of the primary.  The 2020 Supreme Court primary saw the conservative candidate get over 50% of the primary vote (3-way race), then he got blown out in the general. -- Asdasdasdff (talk) 19:58, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Map color scheme
It is officially nonpartisan, but other nonpartisan elections' maps use the partisan colors to identify ideology and party support. Would it be useful here, since the majority flipped? Kart2401real (talk) 16:31, 22 September 2023 (UTC)


 * No. The election was officially nonpartisan, so we should reflect that. The article discusses the implied partisanship and the implications of it, but the map itself should reflect the official nature of the election. Nonpartisan elections for partisan roles (like special elections in Mississippi) I would color with the official partisanship, but this is a nonpartisan election for a nonpartisan role, so we should not color the maps as if the election is partisan. OutlawRun (talk) 16:43, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Would it be good to change articles like California's Superintendent of Public Instruction, mayoral, and county elections, for example, to a nonpartisan color scheme? If so, what colors are used for a nonpartisan color scheme? Kart2401real (talk) 16:59, 22 September 2023 (UTC)