Native Vote 2026
Most people who read my newsletter think of Peggy Flanagan’s campaign for the Senate in historic terms. She is a citizen of the White Earth Nation and there has never been a Native American woman elected to that chamber ever. It’s long past time for that to happen in a representative democracy.
But others see Flanagan as a threat and are willing to spend a lot of money to make sure she doesn’t make that history.
To read more articles by Mark Trahant, go to: Marktrahant.substack.com
It’s not uncommon for U.S. Senate races to cost millions of dollars. But in Minnesota, spending records are being shattered in a primary election, already topping $12 million. The most expensive Minnesota primary ever. And most of that money is trying to make sure that Peggy Flanagan does not win the DFL Primary next month.
The cool thing is the reasons are ideological.
Across the country there are millions of dollars being invested to make sure that “centrist” Democrats win. And the phrase “centrist” captures a few general themes, such as support for the government of Israel, status quo in health care (protecting insurance companies and the pharmaceutical industry), and this year’s largest big spender, the shadowy web that includes crypto traders (including sports betting and prediction markets).
From a new report by Public Citizen:
“In the 2026 midterm elections, corporate money is poised to play a bigger role than ever before in influencing how Americans vote. The cryptocurrency sector’s political playbook from 2024 – prioritizing corporate priorities over parties or candidates and using their financial power to discipline sitting lawmakers and candidates – is spawning copycat corporate campaigns by other sectors.
“Months before Election Day, corporations have already collectively spent $517 million to influence federal elections – a 12% increase over the $461 million that corporations spent over the entire 2024 election cycle and nearly triple the $184.1 million spent by corporations during the previous midterm election in 2022.”
Most of this money is “dark” money. Secret funds that are spent directly by Political Action Funds in support of candidates. In June, one of those groups, North Star Dawn, used a “deep fake” ad to attack Flanagan. (Portraying her as a corporate shill. Cute. The evidence is a PAC for Democratic Lt. Governors. But the thing is, why is Peggy Flanagan on the other side of just about every issue that’s mentioned in the attack ad?)
What is dark money? It stems from a 2010 Supreme Court decision that opened the door for corporations and other outside groups to spend unlimited amounts on elections. Public Citizen says: “This means the full amount of direct corporate influence spending in the 2026 elections is unknown, and certainly higher than the amounts reported and made publicly available in required FEC disclosures.”
Politics in 2026. Dark money. Deep fakes. And interest groups that are working to make sure “their” industry is successful in the next Congress.
Peggy is in the left-center camp. She supports universal health care and that means the health care industry — insurance companies, providers, and the pharmaceutical industry — see her election as a threat. (And it’s an industry that her primary opponent, Rep. Angie Craig, worked in before she was in Congress.)
Source: AIPAC Tracker
Another primary divide is over U.S. support for Israel and its military This is funding from groups and individuals affiliated with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee or AIPAC. This is a tricky one in this election because the AIPAC brand is toxic in Democratic politics. But that’s where dark money comes in. Donors can privately support candidates without linking back to AIPAC. One estimate is that the PAC has bundled more than $500,000 in contributions for Craig plus the dark money. But it’s important to note that Craig has been a steady supporter of Israel since she entered Congress.
Then there’s crypto money. This is real shade; a tangled web, dark money, and a speculative industry that no one understands. It includes the prediction markets that may be the most corrupt legal enterprise in the country right now. (Wanna bet on an event in the next 15 minutes? Sign me up.)
Quiver Quantitative estimates total spending (and that would be money not going to Peggy Flanagan) is approaching $31.62 million. That’s more than twice the official spending count of $12 million. FYI: The digital tracker charts for both Peggy Flanagan and Angie Craig.
Overall Quiver Quantitative estimates that crypto firms have poured over $189 million into the 2026 midterms.
The findings from Public Citizen:
“Cryptocurrency, artificial intelligence, Big Tech and online betting corporations have collectively spent $294 million to influence federal elections in the 2026 midterm cycle, reflecting a strategic move to spend directly on political action committees to influence federal elections.
“These corporate super PAC political contributions make up 57% of the $517 million that corporations have reported spending on the 2026 midterms so far.
“The 2026 total so far amounts to nearly one third of the $1.58 billion that corporations have spent since the 2010 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United v. FEC to allow direct corporate spending in federal elections.
“The half-billion in midterm spending by corporations breaks the previous record of $461 million in disclosed federal corporate spending set during the 2024 cycle.
“The primary beneficiaries of the $60 million in spending by Big Tech and AI corporations are the sector-focused Leading the Future ($50.1 million) and MAGA Inc. ($6 million)
“The primary beneficiary of the $45.6 million in spending by online betting corporations is the sector-focused Win for America PAC ($43 million).
“Crypto corporations, which pioneered this strategy in the 2024 presidential election cycle, remain the dominant corporate political spenders, as over one third (37%) of the corporate money contributed during this year’s elections came from crypto businesses ($189 million so far).”
Be bold.
A couple of final points.
First: Across the country — so far, at least — the candidates with gobs of money have not been the most successful.
On the PBS News Hour Mo Elleithee from the Georgetown’s Institute of Politics and Public Service, said one of the successful messages in this election year is about being bold. He said: “They’re tired of incrementalism. And right now, the progressive wing of the party sounds bolder. The moderate wing of the party, the centrist, the establishment wing, seems more incremental. And in this day and age, people want a fighter and someone who’s going to be bold in pursuing change.”
Boldness is Peggy Flanagan’s campaign message.
Second: We need to do elections better. I think we should get rid of all outside money and publicly finance campaigns. One interesting way to do that is happening in Seattle’s local elections where citizens get vouchers that they can use to support candidates.
Another take away from the Minnesota, people really don’t like dark money campaign spending.
Open Secrets says: “An overwhelming, bipartisan majority of voters support major campaign finance reforms – including ending dark money spending and restoring limits on money in elections – with support for both proposals exceeding 75 percent across Democrats, Republicans and independents, a new survey found.”
