A Look at 2026 Primary Polling in Wisconsin

Campaigns matter, and a chaotic last month in the Wisconsin Democratic primary is a prime example.

In the Marquette Law School Poll’s final survey of Wisconsin voters, July 22-27, Francesca Hong received 38%. Her unofficial vote total in the August 11 primary election is 39.3%. And 34% said they were undecided. The remarkable difference between poll and outcome was that the poll had David Crowley at 7% and he won with 39.8%. Mandela Barnes, who dropped out three days after the poll was completed, had 16% in the final survey. One clear thing is that the vast majority of late-deciding voters went to Crowley and very few went to Hong.

The race was complicated by three candidates dropping out, and Crowley reentering, in the final month. 

On the demographics of the race, older voters were both the least supportive of Hong and the most undecided age group. They also said they were more likely to vote than did younger voters, providing a potential advantage to Crowley, though they had not settled on him at the time of the final poll.

Another unusual aspect of the race was the very late endorsement of Crowley by Gov. Tony Evers. In our final poll, more than one-third (36%) of Democratic primary voters said that this endorsement made them more likely to support Crowley. Evers’ job approval with Democrats was also over 85%.

Non-response bias is always a potential source of error in polls. In this case, the age and ideological makeup of the survey samples of primary voters was similar to the pre-primary makeup of Democrats, suggesting that young, very liberal, Hong supporters were not overrepresented. Those groups strongly supported her but were not an unusually large share of the samples. Older and moderate voters were more undecided and less supportive of Hong in both of our July polls but had not settled on the very newly returned Crowley at the time of the last survey.

And Hong’s actual vote of 39% was barely different from her 38% in the final poll, further demonstrating that her supporters were not overrepresented in the survey.

Turnout was much larger than in recent Democratic primary contests: an unofficial 792,009, compared to 640,247 in the 2024 Senate primary and 538,857 in the 2018 gubernatorial primary. We don’t know the makeup of that surge beyond the polling results, but this turnout was considerably larger than expected.

On the substantive side, Hong’s performance was generally impressive during most of the campaign, but the late shifts from poll to vote suggest the limits of her appeal. 

Finally, in our mid-July poll (July 8-16), 80% of Democratic primary voters said that it was extremely or very important to nominate a candidate who could win against the Republican in November, and electability became an increasingly common topic in the closing weeks of the campaign. And in the mid-July poll, Hong trailed Republican Tom Tiffany by 3 percentage points, whereas then-candidate Barnes led Tiffany by 4 points (this poll was conducted while Crowley was out of the race). 

The chaotic changes of candidates, plus the governor’s late endorsement and increasing electability concerns, all made for a surprising endgame to the race. 

Note: Below are the tables from the July 29 release showing survey results of the vote and percent undecided, by age and by ideology.

Continue ReadingA Look at 2026 Primary Polling in Wisconsin

Rebuilding Trust, One Story at a Time

Andrew Center LogoIn response to the findings of the recent Marquette Law School Poll, Marquette Law School Poll Finds a Steady Decline, by Age, in Trust in Other People, Professors Mary Triggiano and Becca Donaldson, director and assistant director of Marquette Law School’s Andrew Center for Restorative Justice, offer reflections on how restorative practices can help rebuild trust—one conversation and one story at a time.

Continue ReadingRebuilding Trust, One Story at a Time

Border Republicans vs. Inflation Republicans

We released a new Marquette Law School Poll of Wisconsin voters today. It includes a lot of details about topics like the Wisconsin Supreme Court race (voters aren’t paying much attention yet), the gubernatorial primary (voters aren’t paying attention to that either), and data centers (voters really don’t like them).

Here’s one result from the poll that stood out to me. It comes from a bog-standard polling question that we ask variations of in most surveys. “Which one of the following issues matters MOST to you right now?” We occasionally change the response options based on what’s in the news.

In this poll and our previous October poll, we offered the same 8 options. The choices were jobs and the economy, inflation and the cost of living, public schools, illegal immigration and border security, abortion policy, crime in your community, gun violence, health insurance, taxes, and affordability of housing.

If I had to summarize the consensus as to why Donald Trump won in 2024, two policy issues would rise to the top (setting aside incumbency advantage and the drama around Biden). They are concerns about affordability/inflation and border security/immigration. Trump’s 2024 campaign succeeded in capturing support from voters who cared about each of these, but the two issues share no basic ideological connection.

Trump has, during his first year, struggled to satisfy both concerns. His administration has spent a great deal of political capital on anti-immigration measures. On affordability, Trump has struggled to find a message, insisting at times that the whole issue is a Democratic “hoax.”

Nonetheless, these two issues remain the two most important for Wisconsin Republicans in our surveys. In October, 23% of Republicans (including Republican-leaning independents) listed inflation and the cost of living as their top issue, while 31% chose illegal immigration and border security. In February, the balance flipped, as 27% chose inflation and 22% immigration.

I thought pooling the two surveys might yield some interesting insights into these two large groups of Republicans—those who worry most about affordability and the cost of living vs. those whose main concern is illegal immigration and border security. As shorthand, I’ll call these “border Republicans” and “inflation Republicans.”

Demographic Differences Between Border and Inflation Republicans

Across those two surveys, 25% of Republicans chose inflation and 27% chose immigration/border security as their most important issues. So, among Republicans as a whole, 2 percentage points more preferred immigration and border security. Here is the same calculation for a bunch of different groups within the Republican party.

The biggest gaps are along ideological and age lines.

graph showing the relative number the share of republicans (among different groups) who say inflation and the cost of living is a more important issue than illegal immigration and border security

Self-described “moderates” made up 21% of Republicans in this sample, and they prioritized inflation by 23 points. Self-described “very conservative” Republicans made up a similar 25% of the total, and they prioritized illegal immigration and border security by 17 points.

About a fifth of Wisconsin Republicans are under age 36, and this group prioritized inflation by 21 points. At the other end of the spectrum, 28% of Republicans are over age 65, and they prioritized the border by 25 points.

About a quarter of Wisconsin Republicans identify as a born again or evangelical Christian. They prioritized the border by 12 points. All other protestants (32% of Republicans) prioritized inflation by 6 points. Catholics were evenly divided.

Other differences were smaller. Female Republicans prioritized inflation by 3 points; male Republicans prioritized the border by 4 points. Republicans with no more than a high school degree prioritized the border by 11 points. Those with a college degree preferred inflation by 3 points. There was little difference at all between Republicans by income.

Differences in the Attitudes of Border and Inflation Republicans

Republicans whose top priority is addressing inflation and the cost of living tend to be younger, and more self-consciously moderate. Those who prioritize addressing illegal immigration and border security tend to be older, conservative, and evangelical. In Wisconsin, the two groups are roughly equal in size, and together make up about half the party.

Do these differences in priority translate to different attitudes toward Trump and his party?

First of all, there isn’t much difference in how these people view the Democratic party. Border Republicans are 98% unfavorable and 0% favorable. Inflation Republicans are 92% unfavorable and 3% favorable. More inflation Republicans haven’t heard enough or say they don’t know.

There’s a bigger difference in how these two groups see the Republican party. Border Republicans are 94% favorable, compared to just 79% of inflation Republicans.

The two groups both overwhelmingly opposed Harris in 2024. Of those who voted, 99% of border Republicans supported Trump and 0% Harris. Among inflation Republicans who voted, 93% supported Trump and 1% Harris.

Despite supporting Trump in 2024 by more than 9-in-10, the two groups differ in their assessment of his job performance thus far. Eighty-two percent of border Republicans “strongly” approve of the job Trump is doing and only 1% disapprove. Among inflation Republicans, only 39% “strongly” approve. Most of the rest (46%) “somewhat” approve, so these voters aren’t lost to Trump, but they are low on enthusiasm for him.

That lack of enthusiasm can change elections. All these survey respondents are registered voters, and nearly equal numbers recalled voting in the 2024 presidential elections—95% of border Republicans and 94% of inflation Republicans. Despite this, the two groups vary enormously in their plans to vote in Wisconsin’s upcoming April election. Among border Republicans, 82% are “absolutely certain” they will vote. Among inflation Republicans, only 62% are so certain.

Continue ReadingBorder Republicans vs. Inflation Republicans