Wisconsin Republicans vs. Minnesota Democrats

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Exactly what it says on the tin.

[Matty]

Minnesota is currently doing better right now but that has always been the case. They have a friendlier tax system (though both are bad), and overall just a tradition of being a good state economically.

It's not fair to say that Wisconsin is a symbol of republicanism, either. Badger tax rates and regulatory bureaucracy are regularly included in the tax foundation's "ten worst states" list.

The only real policy difference between the two states is public sector unions. Both states are and will always be blue states with blue policies.

Even when the reds control the statehouses.

[Brewer]

There's no question that Minnesota has done better under the Dayton Administration than Wisconsin has under Walker, who took office at the same time. Hands down to what is obviously my favorite state Democratic Party.

[Mr. Illini]

Minnesota is obviously the better-off and more fiscally sound state right now.

[Ban my account ffs!]

Wisconsin outpaced Minnesota for a very long time. Basically from Minnesota's inception as a state until about 1990, Wisconsin beat us in most categories. Only since then has Minnesota caught up.  The number of jobs in Minnesota has caught up with Wisconsin.
Most of this has to do with the relative corporate power of the Twin Cities.  Outside of the Twin Cities, MN and WI are very similar atm.

[RFayette]

Minnesota was better under Pawlenty than Wisconsin was under Doyle, so I think Minnesota being better off is more of a pattern. 

I mean, Milwaukee is like a mini-Detroit (not that bad, but not great either) whereas Minneapolis/St. Paul are much better off.

[Ban my account ffs!]

MN wasnt better off under Pawlenty than WI under Doyle...we were quite similar.  Anemic job growth, anemic income growth, rising poverty...

We both faced the same issues...old infrastructure, aging population, reliance on nondiverse economies outside of the Twin Cities, which stagnated with new people flooding the labor market.

Incomes grew Among the rich and away from the city...but only among a few established players like large farm owners or local manufacturing.

Meanwhile government services were scaled back year after year.  Both MN and WI suffered in the Bush economy.

The main difference is that since 2008, Minnesota has grown much faster than Wisconsin. This is especially been since 2010 when Dayton and Walker were elected.

We were both in very similar trajectories during the 1990s and in the last decade. Only in this decade have we caught up.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Minnesota is obviously a better run state than Wisconsin in terms of the condition of the economy and the balance of the budget.

In terms of which party officeholders I like better, MN democrats by a long shot. Dayton will always have my scorn due to his legalization of gay marriage and his approval of the vikings totally undeserved new stadium, but aside from that he's honestly been a pretty good governor. Unemployment is below the national average, we have a budget surplus, he cares about education, no taking away the rights of unions (I support just making unions optional to join, not trying to eliminate unions entirely like Walker desires), etc. I genuinely like Klobuchar, and while Franken is merely average, it's not like McFadden would have been any better.

WI Republicans are just bad, bad, bad. Johnson is a complete tea-partier who has never even tried to appear moderate, and Walker is, to put it simply, a corrupt walking disaster.

[Miles]

Minnesota is obviously the better-off and more fiscally sound state right now.