One Wisconsin Now
Press Release

Wisconsin Republicans Need to Answer: ‘Do You Still Support Trump’

Scott Walker Won’t, Will Assembly Republicans?

By - Aug 17th, 2017 11:07 am
Donald Trump. Photo from

Donald Trump. Photo from

MADISON, Wis. — One Wisconsin Now Executive Director Scot Ross is demanding the 64 members of the Wisconsin Republican Assembly Caucus meeting at the State Capitol today condemn by name their party’s leader: Donald Trump.

“Politician Robin Vos wants his members to have cover from having to answer the simple question: ‘Do you still support Trump?’

“Trump made the most disgusting comments coddling racism and racists made by an occupant of the White House in the lifetime of any current living American. If Scott Walker and the Wisconsin Republicans are unwilling to condemn Trump by name, they don’t get to say they stood up against white supremacy, Nazis and racism.”

One Wisconsin Now is a statewide communications network specializing in effective earned media and online organizing to advance progressive leadership and values.

Mentioned in This Press Release


Recent Press Releases by One Wisconsin Now

Gov. Scott Walker Political Operation Snagged $250,000 Check Mere Days After Meeting With Accused Russian Spy

‘Sure looks like Scott Walker's Non-Meeting Meant Something to Somebody’

Republican County Sheriffs Defending Brad Schimel on Rape Kit Backlog Have Backlog of Over 630 Rape Kits

Washington DC-Based Group Taps People Who Are Part of the Problem to Defend Brad Schimel on Rape Kit Backlog

Scott Walker: Wisconsin’s $100 Million Man

‘No Wisconsin Politician Has Raised More Campaign Cash For Himself or Been More Willing to Sell Us Out For a Campaign Contribution’

One thought on “Wisconsin Republicans Need to Answer: ‘Do You Still Support Trump’”

  1. JPKMKE says:

    Once again Trump demonstrated his inability to communicate to the country, and at this time, a time of need. Instead he chose to politicize a response. What would it have taken for Trump to immediately denounce the racial and violent actions without delaying and mixing blame? What benefit did he gain from waiting and responding antagonistically instead of pulling together the country on such an important issue?

    Then reporters baited him—albeit with a disappointingly unsophisticated moral equivalency argument–to which he responded with all of the savvy of a 5th-grader, “they hit me too.” And now The New York Times writes that he declared the two sides moral equals, fulfilling their self-appointed role as a blunt instrument of public opinion. I didn’t actually hear him say that, but he could have. I don’t really understand half of what he says at any time.

    Perhaps it would have been better if he “Reagan-esquely” put his hand up to his ear and smiled, pretending not to hear the question. At least then they wouldn’t be quoting something he may or may not have said in between spitting and sputtering.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *