Wisconsin Governor 2026: the ads, and who's paying for them
Tom Tiffany (Republican) and David Crowley (Democrat) are the candidates for governor of Wisconsin in the November 3, 2026 general election. Semblen has analyzed 51 ads in this race; 39 used at least one manipulation technique, most often loaded language and name calling.
Tom Tiffany (REP), David Crowley (DEM).
On the ballot as listed by Ballotpedia. 51 ads analyzed, 39 with at least one technique in the copy.
Newest first. The paid-for-by line is the advertiser's own filing. Updated 2026-10-08.
37 of 49 (76%) flagged · Loaded Language (26), Name Calling (20), Appeal to Fear (19)
YouTube
2 of 2 flagged · Appeal to Fear (1), Appeal to Prejudice (1), Black-and-White Fallacy (1)
Reported Meta spend
$71,200–112,963 on all ads, $64,400–99,027 on flagged ads · Meta reports ranges; these are the sums of their ends
Example
“bragged” — Loaded Language, paid for by Tiffany for Wisconsin
· the flagged ad with the highest reported spend that shows the most common technique
Embed this race on your site
A small box with these findings and the newest ads, updated as new ads are analyzed. Free for newsrooms, blogs and campaigns alike; it links back here.
Follow Tom Tiffany vs. David Crowley
An email when new ads come in from either side or the outside groups: the techniques, the words doing the work, and who paid. And each debate's analysis the morning after. One-click unsubscribe.
Each side is the campaign plus the groups backing it. How a group is placed is explained below the table.
Side
Ads
With at least one technique
Most common
Tiffany (R)
17
14 of 17 (82%)
Loaded Language (12), Appeal to Prejudice (9), Name Calling (9)
All from the campaign; no ads here from groups placed on this side.
Crowley (D)
11
8 of 11 (73%)
Loaded Language (6), Name Calling (6), Appeal to Fear (4)
Crowley's campaign
10
7 of 10 (70%)
Loaded Language (6), Name Calling (5), Appeal to Fear (4)
1 group backing Crowley
1
1 of 1
False Urgency (1), Name Calling (1)
Not placed on a side (6 sponsors)
23
17 of 23 (74%)
Loaded Language (9), Appeal to Fear (8), Black-and-White Fallacy (7)
Read this before comparing the sides. Ads that attack an opponent use these techniques far more often than ads that introduce a candidate, whoever runs them, so the side running more attack ads shows a higher share. A technique is about wording, not about whether an ad is true. These are online ads only (Meta and YouTube), not television.
Appeal to Prejudice (1), Black-and-White Fallacy (1), Card Stacking (1)
How a group is placed: by its own filings with the Federal Election Commission. A group is with a candidate when it reported spending to support that candidate, or to oppose the other one in the general election. The parties' own committees are with their nominee. Spending against a candidate in a primary places a group nowhere, and neither does our reading of its ads: a group with no such filing is listed as not placed. The sponsor table gives the reason for each.
Decide what counts
Not everyone would call every technique manipulation. Untick the ones you'd call ordinary persuasion and the count updates.
76% of the 51 ads here use at least one of the techniques ticked below (39 ads).
Leaving out the softer ones (loaded language, glittering generalities, slogans, exaggeration, repetition): 69% of ads.
The words doing the work
The words that show up most in phrases our model flagged as loaded language or name calling in this race's ads, by number of ads.
illegal immigrantin 6 ads· e.g. “illegal immigrants”, “bragged about being an "accomplice" to illegal immigrants”
accomplicein 5 ads· e.g. “accomplice”, “bragged about being an "accomplice" to illegal immigrants”
MAGAin 5 ads· e.g. “MAGA billionaires”, “MAGA Republicans”
moneyin 5 ads· e.g. “dark money groups”, “hard-earned money”
sanctuaryin 4 ads· e.g. “sanctuary state”, “California-style sanctuary policies”
affordin 3 ads· e.g. “Wisconsin can't afford David Crowley as governor”, “can't afford”
agendain 3 ads· e.g. “David Crowley's tax-and-spend agenda”, “tax-and-spend agenda”
buyin 3 ads· e.g. “buy this election”, “buy Wisconsin”
Semblen is free to read and has no ads. If this page was useful, you can support it.
Money in this race
Candidates for governor report their fundraising to Wisconsin's state campaign-finance office, not the FEC. This page doesn't cover those reports yet, so it shows no money figures.
The ads
51 ads, newest first. Video transcripts are shown as the model read them, without caption cues like [music].
Showing the 13 ads paid for by Restoration of America. Show all 51 ads
Paid for by Restoration of Americafrom 2026-10-07spend $0–991,000–1,999 impressions
Wisconsin Dems Voted to Trans Kids Forever. Is This Life Under David Crowley?
https://restoration-news.com/wisconsin-dems-voted-to-trans-kids-forever-is-this-life-under-david-crowley
Loaded Language: The phrase 'Trans Kids Forever' uses emotionally charged, provocative language designed to trigger a reaction rather than describe a policy accurately — for example: 'Trans Kids Forever'
Name Calling: Referring to Democratic legislators solely as 'Dems' in a dismissive, derogatory framing to discredit rather than describe their position — for example: 'Wisconsin Dems'
Appeal to Fear: The phrase 'Is This Life Under David Crowley?' frames governance under a named official as an ominous, threatening existence, creating anxiety about consequences — for example: 'Is This Life Under David Crowley?'
Loaded Language
Name Calling
Appeal to Fear
Looks up the ad's factual claims in fact-checkers, primary sources and wire reporting. Takes up to a minute.
Paid for by Restoration of America Pacfrom 2026-10-0712 variantsspend $500–1,68834,200–49,988 impressions
David Crowley stood in the Milwaukee County Courthouse and said the land we live on was taken from its "rightful stewards."
So who does he think Wisconsin belongs to?
He wants to be your governor but doesn't think we should be here...
Vote NO on David Crowley.
Appeal to Prejudice: The rhetorical question implies that someone is claiming ownership or authority over Wisconsin in a way that excludes a particular group, invoking in-group/out-group identity around who 'belongs' in or controls the state — for example: 'who does he think Wisconsin belongs to?'
Appeal to Prejudice
Looks up the ad's factual claims in fact-checkers, primary sources and wire reporting. Takes up to a minute.
Paid for by Restoration of America Pacfrom 2026-10-0712 variantsspend $800–1,98849,100–60,988 impressions
Is this who you want running Wisconsin?
David Crowley claims Wisconsin was taken from its "rightful stewards." Then he asks you to make him governor. Typical politician. Total phony.
Don't elect him governor.
Appeal to Fear: The rhetorical question implies a threat or danger in having this person run Wisconsin, prompting anxiety without providing specific evidence — for example: 'Is this who you want running Wisconsin?'
Card Stacking: The sentence selectively frames Crowley's statement about 'rightful stewards' as disqualifying while ignoring any context or merit behind the claim, then juxtaposes it with his gubernatorial ambition to imply hypocrisy — for example: 'claims Wisconsin was taken from its "rightful stewards." Then he asks you to make him governor'
Name Calling: The labels 'Typical politician' and 'Total phony' are derogatory dismissals used to discredit Crowley without engaging with his actual positions or arguments — for example: 'Typical politician. Total phony.'
Appeal to Fear
Card Stacking
Name Calling
Looks up the ad's factual claims in fact-checkers, primary sources and wire reporting. Takes up to a minute.
An email when new ads come in from either side or the outside groups: the techniques, the words doing the work, and who paid. And each debate's analysis the morning after. One-click unsubscribe.
Paid for by Restoration of America Pacfrom 2026-10-0710 variantsspend $0–9901,900–10,990 impressions
A $10.4 million property tax increase does not happen by accident. It is a budget decision, year over year.
Before early voting starts, look at how David Crowley has handled taxes, spending and public safety as county executive.
His record speaks for itself.
no techniques found
Looks up the ad's factual claims in fact-checkers, primary sources and wire reporting. Takes up to a minute.
Paid for by Restoration of America Pacfrom 2026-10-0711 variantsspend $0–1,0894,700–14,989 impressions
Milwaukee County is projected to be $50.8 million short in 2027. That gap doesn't close itself. It closes through higher taxes, cuts to county services, or both.
Before you vote, get the facts on David Crowley and his poor track record.
Loaded Language: The phrase 'poor track record' uses negatively charged language to frame the subject unfavorably rather than presenting neutral facts — for example: poor track record
Loaded Language
Looks up the ad's factual claims in fact-checkers, primary sources and wire reporting. Takes up to a minute.
Paid for by Restoration of Americafrom 2026-10-06 to 2026-10-073 variantsspend $0–2971,200–3,997 impressions
Where does David Crowley stand on data centers? In his words, Wisconsin should be a data hub “for the entire globe.” Asked to pause new data centers, David Crowley said no. In writing. No limit on how many come to Wisconsin.
Don't let David Crowley turn Wisconsin into the world's data center.
Appeal to Fear: The sentence frames a policy outcome as a threat that must be stopped, creating anxiety about Wisconsin being overwhelmed or exploited — for example: 'Don't let David Crowley turn Wisconsin into the world's data center'
False Urgency: The imperative 'Don't let' implies immediate action is required to prevent an imminent harmful outcome — for example: 'Don't let David Crowley turn Wisconsin into the world's data center'
Exaggeration/Hyperbole: Claiming Wisconsin would become 'the world's data center' is an extreme overstatement used to amplify the perceived threat — for example: 'the world's data center'
Appeal to Fear
False Urgency
Exaggeration/Hyperbole
Looks up the ad's factual claims in fact-checkers, primary sources and wire reporting. Takes up to a minute.
Loaded Language: The phrase 'can't afford' frames Crowley as a costly danger to Wisconsin, using emotionally charged economic language to trigger alarm rather than convey a specific fact — for example: 'Wisconsin can't afford David Crowley as governor'
Loaded Language
Looks up the ad's factual claims in fact-checkers, primary sources and wire reporting. Takes up to a minute.
Black-and-White Fallacy: The sentence presents a binary choice implying Crowley must choose between data centers and people, ignoring any nuance or middle ground — for example: 'chooses data centers over people'
Name Calling: The framing functions as a derogatory label against Crowley, characterising him as someone who prioritises corporate infrastructure over human welfare without substantiation — for example: 'David Crowley chooses data centers over people'
Appeal to Fear: The phrase 'can't afford' implies dire consequences for Wisconsin if Crowley remains in his position, creating anxiety to drive a specific political response — for example: 'Wisconsin can't afford David Crowley'
Loaded Language: The word 'afford' is used in an emotionally charged way to suggest Crowley is a costly burden or danger to the state — for example: 'can't afford'
Black-and-White Fallacy
Name Calling
Appeal to Fear
Loaded Language
Looks up the ad's factual claims in fact-checkers, primary sources and wire reporting. Takes up to a minute.
Black-and-White Fallacy: The sentence frames the choice as binary — either data centers or people — implying no middle ground or nuanced policy position exists — for example: "chooses data centers over people".
Black-and-White Fallacy
Looks up the ad's factual claims in fact-checkers, primary sources and wire reporting. Takes up to a minute.
Appeal to Fear: The phrase implies a direct personal threat to the reader's finances to provoke anxiety — for example: 'Higher taxes for you'
Card Stacking: Presents only one side of a policy decision without context or counterargument, implying unfairness by omitting any justification — for example: 'Tax breaks for data centers'
Black-and-White Fallacy: Frames the policy choice as a binary between data centers and people, ignoring any nuance or broader rationale — for example: 'chooses data centers over people'
Name Calling: Uses the framing to implicitly label David Crowley as someone who betrays ordinary people in favor of corporate interests — for example: 'David Crowley chooses data centers over people'
Appeal to Fear
Card Stacking
Black-and-White Fallacy
Name Calling
Looks up the ad's factual claims in fact-checkers, primary sources and wire reporting. Takes up to a minute.
Appeal to Fear: The short, punchy claim implies the audience will personally suffer higher taxes, creating anxiety to drive a reaction — for example: 'Higher taxes for you'
Card Stacking: Presents only one side of a policy decision — the benefit to data centers — while omitting any context about why such tax policy might exist or what broader economic effects it may have — for example: 'Tax breaks for data centers'
Black-and-White Fallacy: Frames the policy choice as a binary between data centers and people, ignoring any nuance or possibility that the policy could benefit both — for example: 'chooses data centers over people'
Name Calling: Uses Crowley's name in a derogatory framing that labels him as someone who actively harms ordinary people, functioning as a discrediting label rather than a substantive argument — for example: 'David Crowley chooses data centers over people'
Loaded Language: The phrase 'can't afford' is emotionally charged, implying Crowley is a costly danger to the state rather than making a factual economic argument — for example: 'Wisconsin can't afford David Crowley'
Repetition: 'David Crowley' is repeated across sentences 3 and 4 in a short passage to reinforce a negative association through familiarity — for example: 'David Crowley chooses data centers over people. Wisconsin can't afford David Crowley.'
Appeal to Fear
Card Stacking
Black-and-White Fallacy
Name Calling
Loaded Language
Repetition
Looks up the ad's factual claims in fact-checkers, primary sources and wire reporting. Takes up to a minute.
Loaded Language: Emotionally charged words chosen to trigger a reaction rather than convey facts.
Black-and-White Fallacy: The sentence presents a false binary — either data centers or people — implying no middle ground or nuance exists in Crowley's policy positions — for example: "David Crowley chooses data centers over people".
Loaded Language
Black-and-White Fallacy
Looks up the ad's factual claims in fact-checkers, primary sources and wire reporting. Takes up to a minute.
An ad is on this page because its own "Paid for by" line is a campaign in this race; or it ran mostly in WI and names a nominee for governor — unless its sponsor is a campaign for some other office (a U.S. Senate or House campaign included), or it also names WI's Senate nominees, in which case it is on the Senate race's page. Ads from outside groups appear alongside the campaigns' own.
The candidates are the ones certified for the November ballot, from the source linked at the top. Governors are state offices, so there are no FEC filings behind this page: no money figures, and outside groups are placed on a side only when they are a campaign or a party committee.
Campaigns run one text as many separate ads. Identical text from the same sponsor is one card here, marked with its number of variants.
A technique is a specific manipulative move in the wording, found by our model and explained in one line. It is not a claim that the ad is false.
Claims are checked when a reader asks: press "Check this ad's claims" on a card. The check runs once and its result is shown to everyone afterwards. The ten ads with the most money behind them in each race are checked ahead of time.
Claim verdicts say what the cited sources say. A verdict that an ad is wrong or misleading is shown only when it cites an established fact-checker or an institutional record — Congress, a federal agency, a court — and its confidence is not low; a weaker one is not shown at all. Each verdict shows what it rests on and how confident it is. If we got one wrong, press Disagree: a verdict that readers dispute and no one defends comes down.
Video ads come from the campaigns' own YouTube channels; the transcript is analyzed. Meta ads are analyzed on their text; their video and images are not, yet.
Get notified as this improves — new detection models, the browser
extension, and new features. Occasional email, no spam.
Semblen LLC · 5900 Balcones Drive STE 100, Austin, TX 78731 · unsubscribe any time