Jefferson Davis shared the following post election summary from Wisconsin.
Post-election Preliminary Takeaways from the Wisconsin Supreme Court Election
While much has been said, written, posted and broadcasted regarding what appears to be the incredibly disappointing news involving the Wisconsin Supreme Court Election on April 1, 2025, something(s) just doesn’t seem to add up from the following perspectives:
- How can the Voter ID Constitutional Amendment overwhelmingly pass by a 63%-37% margin and the reported winning candidate (Crawford) vehemently be against Voter ID (click here – 2025 Wisconsin Supreme Court Voter Guide – Crawford v. Schimel – Guides.vote | Voters Guides and here – Did Wisconsin court hopeful Susan Crawford oppose voter ID law?), while Judge Brad Schimel has always been a supporter of Voter ID, not win and actually lost by a 55%-45% margin? (click here – 2025 Wisconsin Supreme Court Voter Guide – Crawford v. Schimel – Guides.vote | Voters Guides and here – Wisconsin AG suggests Voter ID helped Trump win the state | AP News ).
- We are aware of and have been in contact with the individual that captured posted election results from some media outlets in Wisconsin just before midnight and long after Crawford was declared the winner and Judge Schimel having called Susan Crawford, that show totally different results. This matter is currently being looked at very closely on a confidential basis with the proper authorities.
- This race has garnered national attention with some national election integrity supporters calling for an immediate investigation from AG Bondi and the Department of Justice to settle once and for all if there is any “there” there to put to rest the seemingly endless unanswered questions from some regarding Wisconsin elections (click here – Wisconsin’s Supreme Court Election Screams for Department of Justice Criminal Investigation – American Thinker).
- One national Podcaster has also posted his take on the Wisconsin Supreme Court Election with guests (click here – https://rumble.com/v6rofaj-what-really-happened-in-the-wisconsin-supreme-court-election.html).
- Joe Hoft has posted regarding the Wisconsin Supreme Court Election as well (click here –https://joehoft.com/what-really-happened-in-the-wisconsin-supreme-court-election-david-clements-jefferson-davis-underdog-report-82/).
- Action Plan – efforts are being considered and coordinated for a much deeper analysis of the April 1, 2025, Wisconsin Supreme Court Election, from the perspectives of cyber, data, legal, financial and administrative to evaluate necessary data to put to bed once and for all if there are concerns that need to be addressed for Wisconsin elections.
The following preliminary analysis of the Wisconsin Election Commission data puts in perspective the many moving parts involving the Wisconsin Supreme Court Race of April 1, 2025:
| Crawford | Schimel | Voter ID “Yes” | Voter ID “No” | Absentee | Under Vote | ||
| Total | 1,301,128 | 1,063,244
Difference 237,884 |
1,435,938 | 852,286 | (372,694) Schimel vs. “Yes” Vote. | ||
| Statewide Total | 2,364,372, Record for Wisconsin Supreme Court Election. | Brad Schimel smashed Dan Kelly’s 2023 total by 244,853 votes or 30%. | 2,288,224 | The “Yes” Voter ID vote won by 583,652 votes. | (76,148) Crawford/Schimel vs. Voter ID. | ||
| % of Vote | 55%-45% | 63%-37% | |||||
| Registered Voter Turnout | 62% – Record for Wisconsin Supreme Court Election. | 2023 Wisconsin Supreme Court Total Ballots Processed 1,858,093 | Protasiewicz – 1,021,822
Kelly – 818,391
55%-45% |
Registered Voter Turnout – Approximately 52%. | Dan Kelly lost by 203,431 votes in 2023.
Brad Schimel lost by 237,884 votes in 2025. |
||
| Total “Active” Eligible Registered Electors | 3,833,455 on April 1, 2025, doesn’t include Same-Day Voter Registrations. | ||||||
| Total “Inactive” Eligible Registered Electors | 4,368,210 ineligible “inactive” names on April 1, 2025. | ||||||
| Total Names in WisVote Database | 8,201,665 | ||||||
| Total Indefinitely Confined | 171,594 on April 1, 2025. Included in the 8,201,665 WisVote Database. | ||||||
| Total Wisconsin Residents | 5.9 million approximately on April 1, 2025. | ||||||
| Voting Age Population (VAP) | 4.6 million approximately on April 1, 2025. | ||||||
| Total Absentee Ballots Sent | 747,964 | 747,964 | |||||
| Total Absentee Ballots Returned | 693,981 | 693,981 | |||||
| Total Absentee Ballots Missing | 53,983 | 53,983 | |||||
| Early In-Person | 363,671 included in Absentee Ballots Sent/Returned. | 363,671 included in Absentee Ballots Sent/Returned. | |||||
| UOCAVA, Long-Term Care Facilities, E.R.I.C., Drop Boxes, Indefinitely Confined, Hospital, USPS, etc. | 330,310
Purchasing the WisVote data will break down these categories individually. |
330, 310
Purchasing the WisVote data will break down these categories individually. |
Electronic Voting Machine Federal Case in the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Chicago with Wisconsin involvement on April 14, 2025
A very important election integrity Federal Case (Case No. 3:24-cv-00664-jdp) with direct Wisconsin involvement will be heard on Monday, April 14, 2025, 9:30 A.M., in the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in downtown Chicago.
We are coordinating a caravan of election integrity supporters that will travel to Chicago on Sunday, April 13th, for an overnight stay to attend the Hearing in Federal Court on Monday, April 14th. Please contact us for details if you would like to join us.
Thanks to the leadership of President Trump and his non-profit affiliated organizations supporting election integrity reform for Wisconsin, the Town of Thornapple (Rusk County) experienced the heavy hand and weight of the Federal Government’s Department of Justice in 2024 when a democrat surrogate from Rusk County contacted the US Attorney General’s Office in Madison to file a complaint accusing the Town of Thornapple of breaking the law (Help America Vote Act – HAVA) regarding electronic voting machine usage for handicapped individuals while voting (click here – Northern Wisconsin town accused of breaking the law by pulling voting machines – WPR).
To the credit of the Town of Thornapple Officials, they felt that they were well within their statutory authority (click here – Wisconsin Legislature: 5.40) and in compliance with HAVA, Title III (click here – PLAW-107publ252.pdf), to vote locally to not use electronic voting machines when state statutes specifically state that voting machines “shall not” be used for an elector that requires “physical assistance” or for an elector that due to “physical disability” cannot depress a button or pull a lever on a machine.
The Town of Thornapple Officials cannot recall ever having an elector with a “disability” or needing “physical assistance” request to use an electronic voting machine, but for sure over the last 25-30 years.
The Town of Thornapple averages anywhere between 330-455 votes in Statewide Elections of all types (click here – Election Results for Thornapple town, WI — RightDataUSA.com).
Electronic voting machines are extremely expensive, must be maintained, have upgrades and costly source code writings (click here – Replacing outdated voting equipment could cost $350M, researchers say | StateScoop).
President Trump’s Executive Order to go to paper ballots and hand count (click here – Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Protects the Integrity of American Elections – ]) will help smaller communities save a lot of money, secure their elections, speed up the process and be more accurate while respecting the needs of those electors that may need help when voting (click here – Searcy County first in Arkansas to return to paper ballots amid voting machine distrust).
A Western Federal District Judge ruled against the Town of Thornapple in 2024 (click here – Rusk County town appealing federal ruling to restore voting machine access for people with disabilities – WPR).
President Trump’s affiliated non-profit organization (America First Policy Institute) will be led by Attorney Nicholas Wanic who will argue that the Federal Government is lacking in the following ways:
- Government has ignored a Central Cannon of Judicial Interpretation How 52 U.S.C 21081 (b) is not “Irrelevant Surplusage” of HAVA.
- Government does not adequately address Congress’s creation of a specific and narrow definition for Voting Systems.
- Government still fails to show how the record supports a finding of irreparable harm and continues to rely only on speculation unsupported by the Record.
The United State Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has 15 Judges led by Judge Diane Sykes originally from Wisconsin (click here – Judges’ Biographies | Seventh Circuit | United States Court of Appeals).
All but 6 of the 15 judges have been appointed by Republican Presidents.
The 3-judge panels are assigned to Cases arbitrarily.
We will let you know how arguments go during the hearing.
Thank you!
The post Wisconsin Post Election Summary from Jefferson Davis first appeared on Joe Hoft.