An independent write-in candidate for Wisconsin governor has openly admitted to removing opponents’ campaign yard signs, filming the acts in Milwaukee’s Riverwest neighborhood, and posting the videos on Facebook as a form of “political dissent.”
Carlos LeMar Dixon, running under the “Wisconsin Rebuild” banner with minimal support and no realistic path to victory, claims to be “part of the lumpen proletariat, the lowest rung of our economic society.” He targeted signs for Democratic gubernatorial candidate Francesca Hong and state Rep. Ryan Clancy, referring to his actions as “taking signs for ransom as hostage” rather than theft. Dixon transported the signs in his vehicle and posted the footage online.
In Facebook posts, Dixon filmed himself stealing the signs in broad daylight. Dixon spelled out his radical motivations: “I am anti MAGA, I am anti-capitalism, I am anti-establishment, I am anti-Zionism, so whoever falls under those categories can feel the wrath of my political dissent.” He wrote, “politicians should be grateful. All I want is yard signs and not their heads,” and declined to clarify whether this was a threat. Dixon stated he would also “snatch” signs supporting Republican gubernatorial candidate Tom Tiffany and would only stop if “we would need to destroy capitalism and Zionism.” He expressed no concern about potential consequences, stating he is “not concerned at all” about arrest and would continue if released. Dixon acknowledged he has “absolutely not” a chance of winning.
The actions violate Wisconsin law, which prohibits defacing, destroying, or removing legally placed election campaign posters, with fines starting at $100 per incident and potential escalation to theft or trespassing charges that carry up to 9 months in jail. Milwaukee police have received no calls for service related to the videos.
Hong, the democrat socialist who received the endorsement of Rep. Ilhan Omar, and has been under fire from both sides for her anti-police rhetoric and threats to use the National Guard to arrest ICE officers, responded on Facebook that “This sucks. Yard signs are freedom of speech. Plus they’re expensive as heck!” Her campaign ordered 1,000 replacement signs and does not plan to press charges. The irony is unmistakable: a self-proclaimed champion of “working people” who rails against capitalism and exploitation now publicly laments the theft of signs that represent the direct product of her campaign’s hard work, fundraising, and spending — taken by a fellow radical who apparently views his own “dissent” as granting him a superior claim to what others produced.
Clancy, who has long pushed anti-police positions, matched the refusal to enforce accountability. In a Facebook response, he wrote that while he does not agree with Dixon’s actions, he would be “concerned that this individual might be in danger if confronted by the police.” He noted the $100 penalty for the sign and that trespassing and theft can carry potential nine-month sentences, adding, “Our jails and prisons in Wisconsin are inhumane and not an appropriate consequence for any action, much less theft.” Clancy stated he would “rather put in a little extra effort to raise the funds to replace them than expose someone to a system that I know to be cruel.” Neither campaign plans to press charges or file ethics complaints.
Dixon’s stunt, while clownish, reveals the ugly underbelly of the radical left now active in Wisconsin politics. His explicit anti-capitalist, anti-Zionist, and anti-establishment “wrath,” currently aimed at far-left rivals, shows how fringe ideologies translate into direct attacks on free political speech and private property. Yet the very candidates currently victimized respond with the same leniency toward lawbreaking they routinely champion, prioritizing the “humanity” of a sign thief over the rights of campaigns and supporters who lawfully placed those signs.
Yard signs remain one of the most basic, protected forms of political expression in any campaign. Dixon may be a fringe figure with no chance of victory, but the soft response from Hong and Clancy illustrates exactly why such behavior persists and why enforcing basic standards of civilized conduct matters.
