Francesca Hong, a Wisconsin Democrat and former DSA member, has moved away from her earlier calls to defund and abolish police, telling a national podcast she is now “serious about public safety” and will not abolish law enforcement. Her previous tweets, now resurfaced, included blunt statements about policing and controversial social commentary on Thanksgiving and prisons, prompting criticism and questions about whether her views have truly changed.
Hong’s pivot came under pressure when hosts played clips of her 2020 social posts and asked directly how her thinking has shifted. She had written that “police exist to uphold white supremacy” and “I support defunding the police as a first step towards abolishing the police.” Those lines forced a concrete response on a national stage.
Her reply was clear and short: “My views have only become stronger in that I’m serious about public safety and I will not abolish the police.” That answer is what voters should expect from anyone running for statewide office, a plain commitment to keep communities safe rather than abstract theory.
Hong tried to explain that her focus has shifted toward practical solutions like funding training and ensuring accountability for officers who break the law. She stressed stopping violent crime and providing law enforcement the resources they need, while holding bad actors accountable.
Pressed again about whether police exist to uphold White supremacy, Hong answered simply, “No.” That unambiguous denial matters, because vague qualifiers and shifting language do not reassure everyday citizens who expect steady leadership on public safety.
She described earlier, more radical language as part of a learning curve: conversations with people “most justice impacted,” mothers who lost children, and community members who live with the consequences of violence. That framing sounds reasonable, but sincerity must be matched by policy and records, not just rhetoric.
Hong also downplayed a prior line about imagining a “world without prisons,” calling that language “more aspirational.” Aspirations are fine for speeches, but voters and law-abiding communities want concrete plans to reduce crime and protect neighborhoods now.
Old social media posts resurfaced and fueled criticism, including a candid 2019 tweet about an anxious restaurant moment: “I ate two bites of my kid’s cheeseburger at a Culver’s in black river falls and told him they ran out of ice cream. Mostly just wanted to leave bc I was on the verge of a [sic] anxiety attack… to [sic] many old white people who didn’t think we spoke English.” That kind of personal anecdote became part of a larger narrative about tone and judgment.
Another since-deleted post read, “Cancel Thanksgiving. Should have done this in 1621. If it takes a worldwide pandemic for us to realize we should stop celebrating colonialism and the original superspreader event that killed indigenous folx [sic] and women, so be it.” Comments like that alarm mainstream voters who want leaders focused on jobs, safety, and practical governance rather than cultural provocation.
Her campaign will now be tested on whether those clearer statements translate into policy choices that reduce crime and support communities. Skeptical voters will be watching for tangible actions, not just revised talking points, to decide if this shift is political soundbite or real conviction.
