logo
Wisconsin Democrats look to harness anger with Musk in court race

Wisconsin Democrats look to harness anger with Musk in court race

Yahoo10-03-2025
Wisconsin Democrats are launching a full-court press against Elon Musk as they look to use angry voter sentiment against him as a tool to turn out voters in the high-stakes Wisconsin Supreme Court election.
The state party this week launched The People v. Musk, a seven-figure campaign including digital advertising, organizing efforts and town hall events, among other aspects, geared toward Democrats as they look to tie Musk to conservative candidate Brad Schimel.
Democrats argue Schimel would be a 'puppet' for Musk if he were to win the April 1 election, which will determine partisan control of the high court.
The effort underscores how vital it will be for both sides to turn out their respective bases in an off-year spring election and could potentially offer Democrats a playbook for how to galvanize anger around Musk in other elections later this year.
'If there's ever a time that Elon Musk money is toxic, it's now,' said Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.). 'As he's dismantling programs for the middle class and firing federal employees and taking away services for my constituents, you know, that's not going to be looked at very positively.'
Schimel and liberal candidate Susan Crawford are fighting for an open seat on the top court in Wisconsin. The party has started to put a greater emphasis on Musk with less than a month to go before the election.
Democratic Party of Wisconsin chair Ben Wikler told reporters on a call this week that they were launching their campaign to 'counter Elon Musk's ongoing effort to buy Brad Schimel a seat on the state Supreme Court.'
The state party recently launched a new 30-second ad, which asserts in part that Musk 'knows MAGA politician Brad Schimel is for sale and will abolish the checks and balances that protect us.'
Musk waded into the race in January, saying it was '[v]ery important to vote Republican for the Wisconsin Supreme Court to prevent voting fraud!'
Musk's group, America PAC, has already poured $4.3 million in the race to support Schimel, according to the latest filing available on Friday. Building America's Future, a group that has received funding from Musk in the past, is spending close to $4 million to oppose Crawford.
Wisconsin Democrats have highlighted Musk's involvement in downsizing the federal government, which has prompted pushback and concerns from voters in townhalls in Wisconsin and elsewhere.
They've also noted litigation making its way through the courts involving Tesla, which wants to open up dealerships in Wisconsin. That case could potentially wind up before the state Supreme Court.
Democrats believe homing in on Musk could be a boost for them in an off-year spring election that won't see nearly the same kind of turnout that it did last November.
'When Democrats find out that the person who they're, you know, protesting outside of Tesla supercharging stations and around the Capital Square, Elon Musk, is, in fact, by far the biggest donor trying to put Schimel on the Supreme Court, that can send their energy level through the roof and drive up Democratic turnout on our side to make sure that Susan Crawford wins,' Wikler told The Hill.
The Schimel campaign called the Wisconsin Democrats' efforts hypocritical, referencing reporting that Crawford participated in a donor advisory briefing. The subject line in the email regarding the briefing said 'Time-sensitive: Chance to put two more House seats in play for 2026.' They also point out that Democrats are also contributing to outside spending in the race.
'Susan Crawford was caught attempting to sell congressional seats to out-of-state billionaires for campaign contributions, prompting the support of extremists like George Soros and [Illinois Gov.] JB Pritzker,' Schimel spokesman Jacob Fischer said in a statement.
'The attempts by Susan Crawford and the Democrats to distract the people of Wisconsin from her extreme views and the radical billionaires funding her are a mockery of hypocrisy,' he added.
The Crawford campaign has previously said she's never publicly or privately weighed in on the issue of congressional redistricting 'and was on this call briefly to share her background and why she's running.'
Sam Roecker, a Democratic strategist working on Crawford's campaign, has suggested that Schimel is the candidate who's been encouraging outside groups to spend.
'He's joked about having to go get knee pads because he's begging so much for money,' Roecker said. 'Somebody who, you know, has said openly that he wants groups, outside groups, to get into this race and spend money.'
As Democrats have started to target Musk in Wisconsin, Democrats in other states have begun using the Tesla CEO as a foil for their campaigns too.
Former Rep. Abigail Spanberger (D-Va.), who's running for Virginia governor, noted the potential impact that federal cuts and slashes would have to her state, posting on X: 'I'm all for improving the way our federal government runs. But that's not what Donald Trump and Elon Musk are doing. They're taking a sledgehammer approach to our federal workforce — with devastating effects on Virginians.'
JoAnna Mendoza, who's running to unseat Rep. Juan Ciscomani (R-Ariz.), said in a statement posted on X last week that 'Elon Musk and his Silicon Valley cronies are as incompetent as they are corrupt, and it's about time someone fought back.'
A Marquette Law Poll released this month suggested a slight majority of voters disapproved of Musk's efforts. Fifty-three percent of respondents viewed Musk unfavorably, compared to 41 percent who view him favorably. Forty-seven percent said DOGE was properly carrying out Trump's agenda while 53 percent said it was disrupting programs required by law.
That same poll also found that the state Democratic Party and state GOP had higher unfavorable ratings than favorable ones, though Democrats had a higher unfavorable rating – 62 percent — compared to the state GOP at 52 percent.
Members of the party say it's a smart play for Democrats to lean into Musk in the Wisconsin Supreme Court race.
'It's a smart move because Musk is well known, very salient (he's in the news every day), and increasingly unpopular,' J.J. Balaban, a Pennsylvania Democratic ad maker who was one of the ad makers for Justice Daniel McCaffery's state Supreme Court campaign in 2023, told The Hill in a text message.
'Expect to see Musk featured in a lot more Democratic ads given that he's transformed himself into a cartoonishly extreme buffoon.'
Republicans, meanwhile, are unimpressed by the recent Democratic efforts.
'It's a one-word strategy and a three-word strategy,' said Wisconsin GOP chair Brian Schimming. 'One word is 'desperation,' and the three word is 'change the subject.' I mean, I don't think that Susan Crawford is performing as well as they thought she was going to, and so they need to change the subject.'
Republican strategist Bill McCoshen noted Wisconsin Democrats' efforts were 'the ultimate hypocrisy in politics,' noting that the state party has previously received outside funding from people like Soros and Pritzker.
But McCoshen also acknowledged that Musk would likely energize both bases to vote.
'Democrats use Musk as a proxy for Trump, and I get that. I probably would too if I were on their side,' he said. 'I think he also sends a signal to low-propensity Republican voters who don't necessarily turn out in spring elections, that, 'Hey, I'm on the field. This is Trump's guy, and this is the guy we need to elect.''
It's too soon yet to say whether Democrats' efforts to focus on Musk will pay off next month. Experts also note that just as big a question is how Musk will play with voters in the middle.
'Musk's participation in the race gives Democrats and liberals another piece to fortify their turnout models. I don't believe that Musk and DOGE and the efforts surrounding Musk and DOGE is … certainly not a turnoff to the MAGA voters. I mean, you know, they're just ready to go,' said Brandon Scholz, a former state GOP executive director.
'The group in the middle, the independents that, you know, Republicans who maybe voted for Trump but weren't enthusiastic about it. I think the book is still out yet…' he added.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Jury awards over $240 million in damages against Tesla in Autopilot crash lawsuit
Jury awards over $240 million in damages against Tesla in Autopilot crash lawsuit

Yahoo

time43 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Jury awards over $240 million in damages against Tesla in Autopilot crash lawsuit

A Florida jury on Friday ordered Tesla to pay hundreds of millions of dollars to the victims of a 2019 fatal crash involving its Autopilot driver assist technology. The verdict which comes after a four-year long case could encourage more legal action against Elon Musk's electric car company. A Miami jury decided that Elon Musk's car company Tesla was partly responsible for a deadly crash in Florida involving its Autopilot driver assist technology and must pay the victims more than $240 million in damages. The federal jury held that Tesla bore significant responsibility because its technology failed and that not all the blame can be put on a reckless driver, even one who admitted he was distracted by his cellphone before hitting a young couple out gazing at the stars. The decision comes as Musk seeks to convince Americans his cars are safe enough to drive on their own as he plans to roll out a driverless taxi service in several cities in the coming months. The decision ends a four-year long case remarkable not just in its outcome but that it even made it to trial. Many similar cases against Tesla have been dismissed and, when that didn't happen, settled by the company to avoid the spotlight of a trial. 'This will open the floodgates,' said Miguel Custodio, a car crash lawyer not involved in the Tesla case. 'It will embolden a lot of people to come to court.' The case also included startling charges by lawyers for the family of the deceased, 22-year-old, Naibel Benavides Leon, and for her injured boyfriend, Dillon Angulo. They claimed Tesla either hid or lost key evidence, including data and video recorded seconds before the accident. Tesla said it made a mistake after being shown the evidence and honestly hadn't thought it was there. 'We finally learned what happened that night, that the car was actually defective,' said Benavides' sister, Neima Benavides. 'Justice was achieved.' Tesla has previously faced criticism that it is slow to cough up crucial data by relatives of other victims in Tesla crashes, accusations that the car company has denied. In this case, the plaintiffs showed Tesla had the evidence all along, despite its repeated denials, by hiring a forensic data expert who dug it up. 'Today's verdict is wrong," Tesla said in a statement, 'and only works to set back automotive safety and jeopardize Tesla's and the entire industry's efforts to develop and implement lifesaving technology,' They said the plaintiffs concocted a story 'blaming the car when the driver – from day one – admitted and accepted responsibility.' In addition to a punitive award of $200 million, the jury said Tesla must also pay $43 million of a total $129 million in compensatory damages for the crash, bringing the total borne by the company to $243 million. 'It's a big number that will send shock waves to others in the industry,' said financial analyst Dan Ives of Wedbush Securities. 'It's not a good day for Tesla.' Tesla said it will appeal. Even if that fails, the company says it will end up paying far less than what the jury decided because of a pre-trial agreement that limits punitive damages to three times Tesla's compensatory damages. Translation: $172 million, not $243 million. But the plaintiff says their deal was based on a multiple of all compensatory damages, not just Tesla's, and the figure the jury awarded is the one the company will have to pay. It's not clear how much of a hit to Tesla's reputation for safety the verdict in the Miami case will make. Tesla has vastly improved its technology since the crash on a dark, rural road in Key Largo, Florida, in 2019. But the issue of trust generally in the company came up several times in the case, including in closing arguments Thursday. The plaintiffs' lead lawyer, Brett Schreiber, said Tesla's decision to even use the term Autopilot showed it was willing to mislead people and take big risks with their lives because the system only helps drivers with lane changes, slowing a car and other tasks, falling far short of driving the car itself. Schreiber said other automakers use terms like 'driver assist' and 'copilot' to make sure drivers don't rely too much on the technology. 'Words matter,' Schreiber said. 'And if someone is playing fast and lose with words, they're playing fast and lose with information and facts.' Schreiber acknowledged that the driver, George McGee, was negligent when he blew through flashing lights, a stop sign and a T-intersection at 62 miles an hour before slamming into a Chevrolet Tahoe that the couple had parked to get a look at the stars. The Tahoe spun around so hard it was able to launch Benavides 75 feet through the air into nearby woods where her body was later found. It also left Angulo, who walked into the courtroom Friday with a limp and cushion to sit on, with broken bones and a traumatic brain injury. But Schreiber said Tesla was at fault nonetheless. He said Tesla allowed drivers to act recklessly by not disengaging the Autopilot as soon as they begin to show signs of distraction and by allowing them to use the system on smaller roads that it was not designed for, like the one McGee was driving on. 'I trusted the technology too much,' said McGee at one point in his testimony. 'I believed that if the car saw something in front of it, it would provide a warning and apply the brakes.' The lead defense lawyer in the Miami case, Joel Smith, countered that Tesla warns drivers that they must keep their eyes on the road and hands on the wheel yet McGee chose not to do that while he looked for a dropped cellphone, adding to the danger by speeding. Noting that McGee had gone through the same intersection 30 or 40 times previously and hadn't crashed during any of those trips, Smith said that isolated the cause to one thing alone: 'The cause is that he dropped his cellphone.' The auto industry has been watching the case closely because a finding of Tesla liability despite a driver's admission of reckless behavior would pose significant legal risks for every company as they develop cars that increasingly drive themselves. (FRANCE 24 with AP)

Buy, Sell or Hold Navitas Stock? Key Tips Ahead of Q2 Earnings
Buy, Sell or Hold Navitas Stock? Key Tips Ahead of Q2 Earnings

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Buy, Sell or Hold Navitas Stock? Key Tips Ahead of Q2 Earnings

Navitas Semiconductor NVTS is set to release its second-quarter 2025 results on Aug. the second quarter of 2025, net revenues are expected to be between $18 and $20 million. The Zacks Consensus Estimate for second-quarter revenues is pegged at $14.5 million, suggesting a year-over-year decline of 29.1%. The consensus mark for loss is pegged at 5 cents per share for the second quarter of 2025, unchanged over the past 30 days. NVTS reported a loss of 7 cents per share in the year-ago quarter. Navitas Semiconductor Corporation Price and EPS Surprise Navitas Semiconductor Corporation price-eps-surprise | Navitas Semiconductor Corporation Quote Let's see how things have shaped up for this announcement. Key Factors to Note for NVTS Earnings Navitas Semiconductor is a well-known provider of power semiconductors driven by its GaN (gallium nitride) business, under GaNFast, GaNSafe and GaNSense brands. Investments by NVIDIA NVDA and Tesla in GaN technology, as well as expanding footprint across mobile, electric vehicle (EV), and energy sectors, bode well for Navitas' prospects. However, sluggishness in solar, EV and industrial end-markets is expected to have negatively impacted second-quarter 2025 results. Unfavorable product mix is expected to have hurt gross margin in the to-be-reported quarter. Uncertainty over tariffs and trade issues between the United States and China has been a headwind for Navitas. NVTS Shares Outperform Sector Navitas Semiconductor shares have jumped 97.8% year to date, outperforming the broader Zacks Computer and Technology sector's return of 11.4% and the Zacks Electronics Semiconductors industry's return of 16.7%. NVTS Stock's Performance Image Source: Zacks Investment Research Navitas Semiconductor stock is not so cheap, as the Value Score of F suggests a stretched valuation at this terms of the forward 12-month Price/Sales, NVTS is trading at 16.92X, higher than the broader sector's 6.71X. Price/Sales (F12M) Image Source: Zacks Investment Research Navitas Semiconductor stock is currently trading above the 50-day and 200-day moving averages, indicating a bullish trend. NVTS Stock Trades Above 50-Day and 200-Day SMAs Image Source: Zacks Investment Research NVTS' Strong Portfolio Aids Growth Amid Stiff Competition Navitas Semiconductor is ramping up new 80 - 120V GaN devices in 2025 to target the 48V DC-DC converter market. In Solar & Energy Storage, the launch of NVTS' bidirectional GaN ICs – GaN BDS, in the first quarter of 2025, is enabling single-stage power conversion. This disrupts traditional two-stage architectures used in more than 70% of power electronics, reducing cost, size and power loss by 30% or more. The innovation reveals high-efficiency applications across solar microinverters, EV onboard chargers, energy storage and motor control systems, with customer ramp-ups expected in late 2025 and the EV domain, NVTS has secured more than 40 design wins across China, Europe, the United States and Korea. With a rapidly expanding $900 million EV pipeline, Navitas is poised to scale in high-voltage, high-efficiency onboard and roadside chargers beginning in expanding relationship with NVIDIA is noteworthy. In May, Navitas Semiconductor collaborated with NVIDIA to support the development of NVIDIA's new 800V high-voltage DC (HVDC) architecture. NVIDIA's 800V HVDC approach is designed for next-generation AI data centers, including systems like NVIDIA Rubin Ultra. NVIDIA 800V HVDC architecture will improve end-to-end power efficiency up to 5%, reduce maintenance costs by 70%, and lower cooling costs, all using NVTS' GaNFast and GeneSiC power Navitas Semiconductor faces significant competition from the likes of Wolfspeed WOLF and Power Integrations POWI. These rivals continue to invest aggressively in wide bandgap technologies, supported by stronger revenue bases and deeper customer relationships. Power Integrations' GaN portfolio includes InnoSwitch3, InnoMux-2 ICs, HiperPFS and Scale-2 Gate Drivers. Power Integrations is the only GaN supplier offering devices rated at 900V, 1250V and 1700V, giving it an advantage in grid-tolerant and high-voltage applications. Wolfspeed has been taking initiatives to expand manufacturing capacity. A state-of-the-art, automated 200-millimeter (mm) capable silicon carbide device fabrication facility in New York (the Mohawk Valley fab) is noteworthy. Wolfspeed enjoys a first-mover advantage in 200-mm wafer volume production, which is the silicon carbide industry's most advanced technology. Conclusion NVTS' muted revenue growth outlook in the near term, along with a stretched valuation, makes the stock risky for investors. Navitas Semiconductor currently has a Zacks Rank #4 (Sell), which implies that investors should avoid the stock ahead of second-quarter 2025 results. You can see the complete list of today's Zacks #1 Rank (Strong Buy) stocks here. Want the latest recommendations from Zacks Investment Research? Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report NVIDIA Corporation (NVDA) : Free Stock Analysis Report Power Integrations, Inc. (POWI) : Free Stock Analysis Report Wolfspeed (WOLF) : Free Stock Analysis Report Navitas Semiconductor Corporation (NVTS) : Free Stock Analysis Report This article originally published on Zacks Investment Research ( Zacks Investment Research Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

Tesla ordered by Florida jury to pay $329 million in Autopilot crash
Tesla ordered by Florida jury to pay $329 million in Autopilot crash

CNN

time2 hours ago

  • CNN

Tesla ordered by Florida jury to pay $329 million in Autopilot crash

FacebookTweetLink A Florida jury on Friday found Tesla liable in the 2019 fatal crash of an Autopilot-equipped Model S, and ordered Elon Musk's automaker to pay $329 million to the family of a deceased woman and an injured survivor. Jurors in Miami federal court ordered Tesla to pay $129 million in compensatory damages and $200 million in punitive damages to the estate of Naibel Benavides Leon and to her former boyfriend Dillon Angulo. Lawyers for the plaintiffs said the trial was the first involving the wrongful death of a third party resulting from Autopilot. The plaintiffs had sought $345 million. Tesla has faced many similar lawsuits over its vehicles' self-driving capabilities, but they have been resolved or dismissed without getting to trial. A judge rejected Tesla's efforts to dismiss the case earlier in the summer, and experts said this may encourage other litigants against the EV maker. 'I think it's a big deal,' said Alex Lemann, a professor at Marquette University Law School, who said this may make future settlements more expensive for Tesla. 'This is the first time that Tesla has been hit with a judgment in one of the many, many fatalities that have happened as a result of its auto-pilot technology.' Friday's verdict could impede efforts by Musk, the world's richest person, to convince investors that Tesla can become a leader in so-called autonomous driving for private vehicles as well as robotaxis it plans to start producing next year. Shares fell 1.8% on Friday. Tesla plans to appeal, according to published reports. The Austin, Texas-based company and its lawyers did not immediately respond to several requests for comment. The trial concerned an April 25, 2019, incident where George McGee drove his 2019 Model S at about 62 mph through an intersection into the victims' parked Chevrolet Tahoe as they were standing beside it on a shoulder. McGee had reached down to pick up a cellphone he dropped on his car's floorboard and allegedly received no alerts as he ran a stop sign and stop light before hitting the victims' SUV. 'We have a driver who was acting less than perfectly, and yet the jury still found Tesla contributed to the crash,' said Philip Koopman, a Carnegie Mellon University engineering professor and expert in autonomous technology. 'The only way the jury could have possibly ruled against Tesla was by finding a defect with the Autopilot software. That's a big deal.' Benavides Leon was allegedly thrown 75 feet to her death, while Angulo suffered serious injuries. 'Tesla designed Autopilot only for controlled-access highways yet deliberately chose not to restrict drivers from using it elsewhere, alongside Elon Musk telling the world Autopilot drove better than humans,' Brett Schreiber, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said in a statement. 'Today's verdict represents justice for Naibel's tragic death and Dillon's lifelong injuries,' he added. Last month, Tesla posted its biggest quarterly sales decline in more than a decade, and profit fell short of Wall Street forecasts.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store