Analysis Summary:

The article snippet appears mostly accurate based on the limited information provided. The claims about widespread storms and the Wisconsin Supreme Court race are plausible, though not directly verifiable with the provided sources. The lack of context makes a full assessment difficult.

Detailed Analysis:

• Claim 1: Widespread storms leave hundreds of thousands without electricity.** This claim is not directly verifiable with the provided sources. However, it is a plausible news event. Without specific details (location, date, etc.), it's impossible to confirm its accuracy using the provided sources.
• Claim 2: Expert unpacks the $80 million Wisconsin Supreme Court race.** This claim is also not directly verifiable with the provided sources. The existence of a Wisconsin Supreme Court race and the involvement of experts are plausible, but the $80 million figure and the "unpacking" aspect require further verification.

Supporting Evidence/Contradictions:

• There is no supporting evidence or contradictions within the provided sources, as they do not cover the specific claims made in the article snippet.
• Internal Knowledge: While I have general knowledge of news events, I am refraining from using it extensively due to the instructions. The plausibility of the claims is based on general awareness of news cycles.