Wisconsin Supreme Court candidates Brad Schimel and Susan Crawford participate in a debate Wednesda... — Wisconsin Supreme Court candidates Brad Schimel and Susan Crawford participate in a debate Wednesday, March 12, 2025, in Milwaukee. (AP Photo/Morry Gash) Credit: ASSOCIATED PRESS

MADISON, Wis. (AP) — When Republicans are looking for a political bogeyman, they point to liberal megadonor George Soros. Democrats recently have been answering with a villain of their own: the world’s wealthiest man and close adviser to President Donald Trump, Elon Musk.

Now, the billionaires’ influence on politics is colliding in a spring election that will decide whether conservatives or liberals control the supreme court in an important presidential battleground state. Both Musk and Soros have spent large sums on the race for an open seat on the Wisconsin Supreme Court, making them easy targets in a debate between the two candidates Wednesday.

While the race is officially nonpartisan, Democrats and Republicans have lined up behind each candidate. Former state Attorney General Brad Schimel, who is backed by Republicans, called Soros a “dangerous person to have an endorsement from.” The philanthropist has spent $1 million to benefit his opponent, Democratic-supported Dane County Circuit Judge Susan Crawford.

She fired back by saying Musk “has basically taken over Brad Schimel’s campaign.” The Tesla and SpaceX CEO who is running Trump’s massive federal cost-cutting initiative has funded two groups that have together spent more than $10 million to promote Schimel.

The exchange highlighted how the April 1 election, which will affect looming cases on abortion, voting rules, congressional district boundaries and more, has drawn national scrutiny in a year when there are just a handful of consequential elections. It also showed how the two polarizing billionaires are playing an outsized role in the race, as each side seeks to weigh down the other with political baggage.

Those tactics make sense in an off-year, spring election when voters may not know the candidates or be paying much attention, said Matt Gorman, a Republican strategist.

“You’ve got to tie it to national themes,” he said. “The overall strategy is, how can you scare your base into making sure they show up at the polls?”

Soros has been reviled by conservatives for years for his donations to liberal prosecutors and other left-wing and anti-authoritarian causes. Musk, a newer power player in political giving, has angered liberals because of his role in Trump’s campaign last year — his super PAC spent about $200 million to help get Trump elected — and his efforts to slash federal government services and staff through the new Department of Government Efficiency.

Soros has been a longtime target of conservatives

The 94-year-old Hungarian American and Jewish billionaire has been a conservative target for decades.

Core to their ire is the spending he and affiliated groups have done to elect liberal prosecutors — officials that Republicans argue are too soft on crime. GOP lawmakers have called attention to Soros’ donations in efforts to recall those prosecutors, saying the people he supports have put communities at risk.

Trump also has used Soros to tarnish the credibility of people and groups he doesn’t like. In a recent executive order aiming to punish the law firm Perkins Coie, he said the firm “has worked with activist donors including George Soros to judicially overturn popular, necessary, and democratically enacted election laws.”

Attacks on Soros often veer into antisemitic and conspiratorial territory, with some falsely casting him as backing violent protesters or having secretive family ties.

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán — an ally of Trump — has boosted that trope by promoting the belief that Soros is engaged in covert plots to destabilize Hungary. Pressure from the autocratic leader prompted a university Soros founded to move its programs from Budapest to Vienna in 2018.

Ahead of the 2023 Wisconsin Supreme Court race, Soros gave $1 million to the Wisconsin Democratic Party. He made a donation in the same amount ahead of this year’s race, prompting Schimel and his supporters to invoke Soros in campaign messaging and ads.

“Susan Crawford takes her marching orders from George Soros, (Illinois Gov.) JB Pritzker, anti-ICE sheriffs, and Defund the Police radicals,” Schimel’s campaign wrote on X earlier this month. “Which side are you on?”

Musk’s new political relevance gives Democrats a rebuttal

Musk hurtled onto the political scene in the last couple of years, spending big money to secure Republican control of the federal government and in states where he has businesses.

Last year, he spent nearly $300 million on Republican campaigns, according to Federal Election Commission filings. The bulk of that was to boost Trump, but a super PAC he founded also spent millions on U.S. House races.

Musk also has dabbled in state politics in Texas, where he has moved several of his businesses. He became involved in the Wisconsin Supreme Court race shortly after Tesla sued the state in a dispute over a law barring automakers from operating or controlling vehicle dealerships. The case ultimately could end up before the state Supreme Court.

The curious timing, his unabashed support for Trump and his chaotic moves in the federal government, make Musk a dream target for the left, said Wisconsin Democratic strategist Joe Zepecki, who is not involved in the race.

“Having a villain makes everything easier,” he said. “It’s not a cue to the partisans – it’s a clarion call. Crawford is with us, and Schimel is in the pocket of Elon Musk, the most unpopular person in America right now who can’t get off the front page.”

Crawford has leaned into the attacks, referring to Musk as “Elon Schimel” in the debate. She also reminded voters of Musk’s actions at DOGE, such as recommending the firing of government workers helping to fight the avian flu outbreak.

The race, which is seen as a litmus test of how a battleground state’s voters are responding to the first months of the Trump presidency, also might offer clues into how they view Musk’s role in the administration.

The strategy isn’t without risk

A challenge both candidates face is that as they attack each other for being supported by notorious high-dollar donors, they must rationalize having their own wealthy benefactors.

Crawford needs to associate Schimel with Trump as much as possible to win, said Brandon Scholz, a former Republican strategist in Wisconsin who now identifies as an independent. The Musk donations help with that – as do flyers distributed to voters by Musk’s America PAC that say Schimel will “ support President Trump’s agenda.”

There could soon be more opportunities to show those ties: A Monday town hall billed as a get-out-the-vote effort for Schimel will be co-hosted by one of Trump’s sons, Donald Trump Jr., and political activist Charlie Kirk.

Schimel, meanwhile, needs diehard Trump voters to come out to the polls, said Scholz. It’s a “double-edged sword,” he said, because it means the candidate will have to gamble with turning off some voters.

Soros also has less name recognition than Musk right now, Scholz said. That could be one reason why Schimel has relied more in recent weeks on traditional conservative messaging, such as accusing his opponent of letting criminals off with lenient sentences.

During the debate, he said he has no control over outside donations or the messages they spread. He also said he wouldn’t give Trump or Musk special treatment if he’s elected to the court. Instead, Schimel said, he treats the courtroom like a baseball umpire would — “not rooting for any team.”

Crawford also distanced herself from Soros’ donation by noting it was made to the Democratic Party of Wisconsin, which has endorsed her. She said while Schimel has revealed how he’ll vote on some pending cases, she has “never promised anything, and that is the difference.”

___

Swenson reported from New York.

___

The Associated Press receives support from several private foundations to enhance its explanatory coverage of elections and democracy. See more about the AP’s democracy initiative here. The AP is solely responsible for all content.